Resurrecting The Old ‘’isms’’ And The Fear They Inspire
By Roger Rosenquist
It’s become common to hear the word “communism” used to label anyone who disagrees with, or policies that don’t align with, the objectives of the current administration. Lately, the label of “communism” has replaced a previously commonly derided label of "socialism". This shift in labels is simply an extension of fear-based politics.
I recently wrote about the politics of fear and why fear is so frequently and effectively used by authoritarian regimes. Now it’s important to examine the reason behind the shift in the use of these fear-based labels.
A recently released GOP memo instructs members in the use of the new label and provides a clear insight into the reason for the change:
“Ahead of the midterms, a conservative firm is warning House Republicans to smear liberals as ‘communists,’ saying that socialism ‘alarms far fewer in the abstract’.”
“Communism rings the loudest alarm with constituents (42 percent name it the most dangerous system), so do not retreat to the softer label just because socialism alarms fewer in the abstract. Connect all three, fruit of the same poisonous tree, and let the family name carry the alarm.”
The memo offers no evidence to prove the accuracy of describing liberals with the new label of communism, however, it clearly explains the desired GOP shift away from labeling liberals as socialists.
The undisputed popularity of Social Security and Medicare - both federal social programs - certainly makes it difficult for the radical right-wing to get traction by promoting a “fear factor” of socialism, and is a motivation to pivot to a new “ism” that introduces the fear of communism, regardless of the lack of evidence to support it.
At the same time, the GOP attempt to make the label of “communism” stick when describing liberals will not be easy while the administration and GOP members are embracing government involvement and control of private companies, despite a significant lack of public support for it. “About half of Americans believe it isn’t appropriate for the U.S. government to take ownership in U.S.-based companies, CNBC’s new All-America Economic Survey found.”
At the very least, government control of private companies runs counter to what was a traditional commitment to capitalism by so-called conservatives. At its worst, it opens a Pandora's box of potential corruption and possible self-dealing decision making.
The U.S. steel industry is one example. Despite - or more likely, because of being heavily protected through tariffs and other government measures over the years, the U.S. Steel Corporation was taken private by a Japanese firm in 2025.
In another recent case, the U.S. government took 10% ownership of chipmaker Intel in August 2025, when the Trump administration decided it wanted that equity stake in exchange for a previous U.S. government agreement, under legislation passed during the Biden administration, to provide $8.9 billion in grants to Intel. (So the grant money was actually turned into the country's purchase price for a minority stake in the chipmaker.) It’s important to note that the initial grant was approved by legislation passed during the Biden administration, named the CHIPS and Science Act, to rebuild domestic semiconductor manufacturing, secure critical technology supply chains, and protect U.S. national security. The subsequent equity stake purchase by the current administration was negotiated without any congressional oversight and simply announced on social media.
A July 2026 study by the Cato Institute documents the extent to which the current administration has expanded its reach into a total of 30 private companies.
This recent Republican support of government ownership of private companies is clearly in conflict with traditional Republican support of Capitalism, so let’s be clear on the difference between Communism and Capitalism, which are essentially polar opposites as economic and political systems:
Communism Core Ideas
No Private Property: People do not own land, houses, or businesses by themselves. The community or the state owns them.
No Social Classes: Everyone is equal. There is no upper class, middle class, or lower class.
Shared wealth: Goods and food are shared. People work as they are able and get what they need.
Capitalism Core Ideas
Private property: People can own land, homes, and businesses.
Profit goal: Businesses try to make more money than they spend.
Free market: Prices go up and down based on supply and demand.
Competition: Companies compete with each other by making better or cheaper items.
Believing the accusation that anyone who supports federal, state, or local social programs that assist people in need are, in effect, supporting Communism ignores the true meaning of what Communism is as an economic and political system. But of course, using labels to demonize and foster fear of others always ignores truth. And those who resort to name-calling by labels are more interested in fomenting fear than finding the truth.
The current practice of labeling opponents as communists without evidence is reminiscent of the infamous investigation and hearings conducted by Wisconsin Senator Joseph McCarthy and televised to the public. McCarthy’s bullying of witnesses led to a confrontation with attorney Joseph Welch, who posed the famous question to him, “Have you no sense of decency, sir?”. McCarthy was subsequently censured by the U.S. Senate for conduct unbecoming of a senator, ending his political power.
Those who choose to follow the same tactics today should perhaps take heed of history.
Notes:
1 https://www.ms.now/opinion/communists-democratic-socialists-memo-house-republicans-midterms
2 https://bipartisanpolicy.org/press-release/2025-social-security-poll/
4 https://www.cnbc.com/2026/07/20/trump-government-company-ownership-americans-wary-cnbc-poll.html
5 https://www.cbsnews.com/news/intel-intc-shares-trump-apple-chip-agreement/
6 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CHIPS_and_Science_Act
7 https://www.eisenhowerlibrary.gov/research/online-documents/mccarthyism-red-scare
