America’s Silent Socialist Shift

11 Socialist Features the Founders Never Imagined

The United States was founded as a democratic republic with a Constitution that explicitly limits federal power, protects individual liberties, and restrains government from overreaching into private life and the economy.

The framers emphasized enumerated powers, separation of powers, federalism, and checks and balances to prevent the concentration of authority that could lead to tyranny.

Yet over time, particularly since the Progressive Era and accelerating through the New Deal, Great Society, and subsequent expansions, American society has adopted numerous features of socialism and communism.

These include centralized government control over key sectors, heavy redistribution of resources from producers to non-producers, expansive regulatory bureaucracies, and a cultural shift toward viewing the state as the primary solver of social and economic problems.

While the U.S. retains capitalist markets and democratic elections, these developments represent a gradual drift toward collectivist principles—state ownership or heavy direction of production, “from each according to his ability, to each according to his need”—that contrast with the founders’ vision of limited government.

Read on for details.

Here are eleven notable examples of America’s Silent Socialist Shift.

1. Government as Solver of All Problems
   The U.S. Constitution aimed to create a limited federal government with only specific enumerated powers, leaving most authority to states and individuals under the Tenth Amendment. The framers feared centralized power, drawing from experiences under British rule. They designed our system to prevent government from trying to address every societal ill. But over time, especially during the New Deal under FDR in the 1930s, this shifted dramatically. The Supreme Court initially resisted but ultimately acquiesced, enabling vast expansions under the Commerce Clause and general welfare interpretations. Today, many politicians, both Democrat and Republican, tend to portray government as the default solution for issues like poverty, healthcare, education, and housing—through expensive programs, mandates, and agencies. This paternalistic view echoes socialist ideology, where the state directs society, rather than the constitutional emphasis on individual responsibility and limited intervention. Federal spending now exceeds 23% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP), with “mandatory” programs dominating, far beyond the founders’ constrained vision.

2. Redistribution of Wealth with Progressive Taxation and an Expansive Welfare System
   A core tenet of socialism and communism is redistributing wealth from those who work and the wealthy (producers) to support non-workers or the less productive. This is often justified as “equity.” The U.S. federal tax system is highly progressive. This means people don’t pay the same percentage, which naturally would result in people paying a greater amount when they earn more. Instead, earners pay a higher percentage of their income in taxes as they earn more, increasing their burden and responsibility for the act of making more income. Therefore, individual income taxes are funded disproportionately by higher earners. Combined with payroll taxes, federal revenue hovers around 17-18% of GDP in recent years. These funds support a massive welfare and entitlement apparatus. In recent fiscal years, federal welfare spending has surpassed $1.3 trillion in direct costs. It includes programs like food stamps (SNAP), with costs rising sharply from earlier decades; Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF); Supplemental Security Income (SSI); and housing aid. Broader mandatory spending on Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid exceeds $4 trillion annually in baselines, with total government welfare approaching or exceeding an estimated $1.8 trillion. The number of people getting SNAP has grown significantly, often with limited or no work requirements. Initially envisioned as a stopgap to help people through emergencies, these forms of welfare have become a way of life for many able-bodied Americans and their families. Critics argue this creates dependency, mirroring communist “class struggle” redistribution. Costs balloon due to expansions and demographics—far from the limited safety net implied under the Constitution. Additionally, these programs have become rife with waste, fraud, and abuse, meaning taxpayers are being forced to send a great deal of their money down the drain.

3. Government-Run or Heavily Subsidized Healthcare
   Socialized medicine is a hallmark of socialist systems. The U.S. has moved in this direction with Medicare for the elderly and disabled beginning in 1965, and Medicaid for the poor. The Affordable Care Act or Obamacare in 2010 greatly expanded the definition of “poor” to make millions more eligible. It also added mandates, subsidies, and exchanges, at a substantial cost to taxpayers. Government now heavily directs healthcare allocation, pricing, and access, covering or subsidizing over 150 million people through public programs or tax benefits. Concurrent with this shift, healthcare costs have risen sharply and Americans have become sicker. This transformation from market-driven care to state-influenced “universal” access echoes single-payer models in socialist-leaning nations.

4. Public Education System with Federal Influence and Funding
   Our current public K-12 education system is funded primarily by state and local taxes, but shaped by federal mandates and money. Federal dollars account for 8-10% of total spending. This system resembles state-controlled schooling in socialist systems where government molds curricula and values. The Department of Education amplifies influence through grants tied to priorities, despite education being left to the states under the Constitution. Total U.S. education spending exceeds $1 trillion annually, with federal involvement in standards, testing, and equity programs. This centralizes control over what children learn, contrasting with the founders’ decentralized approach. It also enables ideological influence and opens the door to waste, fraud, and abuse.

5. Expansive Federal Regulatory State
   Communist and socialist regimes feature heavy state regulation of the economy. The U.S. Code of Federal Regulations has ballooned dramatically since the mid-20th century, with agencies like the EPA, OSHA, FDA, and others imposing detailed rules on businesses, environment, labor, and more. Today, act of opening a business or engaging in commerce is frequently mired in daunting and costly bureaucracy. From owning a vehicle to buying property, the government now reaches into and exerts control over virtually every facet of life. This “administrative state” directs private activity without direct ownership, increasing compliance costs and slowing innovation—a gradual erosion of free-market principles in favor of centralized planning.

6. Social Security and Entitlement Programs as Forced “Social Insurance”
   Social Security, approaching its 100 year anniversary in 2035, functions as a government-mandated pension system, pooling contributions for redistribution. This is classic socialist “social insurance.” Combined with Medicare, these programs dominate today’s federal spending. Payroll taxes fund current beneficiaries, creating intergenerational transfers. While popular, it represents state control over retirement savings, with trustees projecting rising costs as a share of GDP due to demographics, straining the system and echoing collectivist resource allocation over individual provision. Additionally, auditors have documented rampant waste, fraud, and abuse in the programs.

7. Subsidized Housing and Public Housing Programs
   Government-provided housing is common in socialist systems. The U.S. Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program assists millions of low-income households, with tenants paying a portion of income, while federal taxpayers are forced to cover the rest. Broader Housing and Urban Development (HUD) rental aid runs into tens of billions annually. There are also state-owned or managed units. Originating from New Deal-era efforts, these programs redistribute resources for shelter. Critics say they have frequently led to dependency and inefficiency, shifting from private markets to government-mediated access.

8. Agricultural Subsidies and Corporate Welfare Elements
   Socialist economies often feature state direction of production. U.S. farm subsidies and price supports total billions a year. They shield agriculture from market forces, distorting supply and benefiting specific, chosen groups at taxpayer expense. Critics point to the government subsidy of foods and interests that hire well-paid and powerful lobbyists. In some cases, the result has been to produce a great deal of food that is unhealthy, but cheaper than healthy food. Additionally, our food is often being produced using toxic chemicals and means that are making the population sick with chronic diseases, including cancer. Yet the industries are protected and indemnified by the government, since they are government partners. Broader “corporate welfare,” such as subsidies, bailouts, and tax breaks for favored industries, picks winners, resembling cronyist elements of state-directed economies rather than pure capitalism.

9. Public Sector Unions and Government as Employer and Bargainer
   In many states, public-sector unions negotiate with government employers they help elect. This creates a feedback loop fraught with conflict of interest. This gives unions influence over wages, benefits, and policy in education, policing, and administration—without private-sector profit constraints. Collective bargaining in the public sector can lead to higher costs and political power, contrasting with the founders’ wariness of factional interests dominating government.

10. The Surveillance State and Abuses Against Citizens and the Press
    A defining feature of communist and authoritarian regimes is pervasive state surveillance to monitor, intimidate, and control the population. In the U.S., this has manifested through the post-9/11 expansion of intelligence powers, most notably through programs like National Security Agency’s (NSA’s) PRISM revealed by whistleblower Edward Snowden in 2013. That allowed collection of internet communications from major tech companies like Google, Apple, Facebook, and more, under Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). Originally intended for foreign targets, it has enabled overreaching “backdoor” warrantless searches of Americans’ data by the FBI, NSA, and others. Millions of queries in recent years, have targeted journalists, political figures, and ordinary citizens. FISA Court opinions have repeatedly documented “persistent and widespread” FBI violations, such as improper queries for domestic investigations unrelated to national security. And that’s just the bits that we are able to find out about. Much of the government’s secret surveillance and abuses presumably have remained secret. Historical precedents include the FBI’s COINTELPRO (1956-1971), which surveilled and disrupted civil rights leaders like Martin Luther King Jr., anti-war activists, and political groups through infiltration, wiretaps, and disinformation. In 1975, the Church Committee exposed these and other abuses by the CIA, NSA, and IRS. More recently, the federal government has been caught secretly obtaining phone records of journalists under the auspices of “leak” investigations, and monitoring journalists covering sensitive topics. In my case, the government got caught intruding upon my work and personal computers and devices when I was an investigative correspondent at CBS News starting in the 2011 time period. Nobody was ever held accountable for these violations, even when forensics proved the government nature of the intrusions, and even after a former federal agent admitted his involvement. Using surveillance tools against the press and political figures chills reporting and discourages oversight of agencies doing the improper spying. These practices—mass data collection, improper gathering of Americans’ communications, and targeting of media—echo the totalitarian control in socialist and communist systems. Under those systems, the state suppresses dissent and maintains power through secret policing. This is contrary to the founders’ emphasis on privacy and limited government.

11. Environmental and Social Mandates with Central Planning Overtones
    Expansive regulations on energy, emissions, and “green” initiatives direct private industry toward state-preferred outcomes, akin to central planning in socialist systems. They also force ideological theory onto the populous, even when it’s proven to be unscientific or harmful. Combined with equity- or Diversity, Equity, Inclusion (DEI)-focused policies in government programs, this prioritizes collective social goals over individual or market-driven decisions, expanding bureaucratic reach into daily economic and cultural life.

These examples illustrate incremental changes—often well-intentioned—that have layered socialist-like mechanisms onto the republic’s framework. Many characteristics of socialism and communism have been adopted and widely-accepted by all sides of the political system.

The result is a hybrid system with greater government scope, dependency, redistribution, and intrusion than the Constitution envisioned. It raises questions about individual liberty, and the risk of further erosion.

Even without electing socialist and communist leaders, are we already headed down the road toward the sort of socialist-communist society that our forefathers strived to avoid?