July 27th, 2026

Rough transcription of Hour 1

Segment 1
Hello, America. Mark Levin here. Our number 877-381-3811.  877-381-3811. We will go around the world in 3 hours. But before we go to the rest of the world. And we will. I hope you had a great weekend and we’re going to have a great week together. Hope you’re able to watch. My two Fox shows. Saturday and Sunday are two great guests Saturday, General Jack Keane and Sunday. Victor Davis Hanson. You see a lot going on with these Marxists and these Islamists and the woke right neo fascist that I’ve talked about. I want to circle back with you to my book on power. And so we can get into this and have even a more full understanding of what’s taking place, if you will. And so for modern Western societies, most of which are said to be advanced, enlightened and democratic, what I call negative power, negative power. Is more opaque. Or what I call soft negative power, then you might see in these full blown communist and fascist regimes, typically Western institutions have been established gradually by experience and practice or constituted by design to counter and limit the most aggressive forms of negative power. Such as dictatorships or oligarchies. Different forms of that type of centralized authoritarianism. But over time they tend to become susceptible to a softer form of negative power. Political parties and political movements in the West look for advantage in acquiring, holding and expanding their power. With a changing election, laws governing increasingly through non representatives like bureaucrats and so-called independent agencies and and commissions. The rule of carefully selected judges or judicial councils and the like. Now the conflict between honoring and complying with the institutional limits placed on power and the law of self-aggrandizement is both real and perhaps perhaps inevitable over time. Now. I want you to keep something in mind. This book came out two years ago. So I’m writing about things that are transpiring. As it turns out now, before they were in full bloom. But I can see them. I can see them on the move. Now, once the authentic and thought to be effective institutions for limiting excesses of power. Are transformed into Potemkin like fictions. Used to disguise the true intentions. Of the abusers and worse. I transformed into tools in support of the exercise of soft negative power. This is what I term. Excuse me. This is what I term. Authoritarian democracy. Authoritarian democracy. Authoritarian democracy is when a democracy begins to slide into a form of authoritarianism, not all at once. But steadily. Where authoritarian attributes slowly proliferate. In one branch, the democracy begins to envelop, the other’s are all branches coalesce into a whole. Either way, the exercise of power is steadily centralized in the citizenry, increasingly peripheral. It typically results in the rule by unelected governmental branches, that is the judiciary in the administrative state, but can also mutate into excessive executive and legislative empowerment. Authoritarian democracy and the democracies of that sort adopt and use the tactics of authoritarian regimes, albeit first with more of a glove than an iron fist. But the underlying attributes are there. For example, legislatures that passed tyrannical laws, but which laws are said to be legitimate simply because the legislature adopted them? Courts that disregard due process but which trials are said to do justice because they were held in a court of law, were defense counsel and juries present and so forth. The use of law is said to be a legitimate application of power because it is the law, not because its proper just or moral law. Now. Even today we take this out. Even today, the impact of authoritarian democracy has seeped into our society psyche so successfully that the late Austrian-American economist Ludwig von Mises observed that one of the worst tyrannies of all Marxism has become part of the West’s psyche. He said to a considerable extent. Without knowing it. Many people are philosophical Marxists, although they use a different name for their philosophical ideas. But there are also those, perhaps many, who benefit from the government’s use of soft negative power, including when that power is used, for example, to forcibly redistribute the wealth and property of those who produced and earned it for the use and enrichment of others beyond the usual and basic needs of a civil society. And they justify what would otherwise be considered thievery as noble and even moral. The beneficiaries of such soft negative power are fully aware that they did not earn what they have received, but delude themselves in various ways that they are deserving of it. You know, I saw an example of this online. I wish I knew who I’d give them credit. One successful person. You take their money and you give it the five lazy people who don’t work. But that one successful person is one vote. There’s five lazy people who don’t work. That’s five votes. And I think this cuts right to the to the heart of the matter, doesn’t it? The one successful person. Is one vote. So if you’re interested in political power, governmental power. You can seize the wealth of that one person to lose one vote, give the five people and gain five votes. And that’s part of the problem with democracies, which is why we’re not a democracy. We are a republic. And so after the break, that brings me back to the Democratic Socialists of America and want to apply this to them. And we’ve kind of outlined already what their policies are. But I want you to hear it from from one of their own. We have tried to get these senior people on the program and they will not come on the program, as I’ve explained to you before. They won’t come on the program because I understand what they’re saying. I understand their ideology. I understand that the effectiveness of all of it. Whereas some people are very superficially questioning them, we would be cutting right to the chase. We’ll be right back.

Segment 2
Now the Democratic Socialists of America are communists. I like to say Marxist. Technically, it’s the same thing, I suppose. But I really want you to think about this before we were hearing from them. How different are they really, from Hakeem Jeffries and the Democrats who were talking about abolishing? Abolishing what? The Electoral College. Abolishing. The Senate, they say, no, we can’t abolish the Senate. Okay. They disagree on that. They talk about abolishing the Supreme Court. But the Democrats, in effect, would do that by turning into something it was never meant to be, by adding seats and turning it into their own politburo. So I’d call that a wash. And the Democrats really are socialists in most respects. And they’ve been pretty blunt about what they want to do to our Constitution, haven’t they? And they’ve embraced the 1619 project. And they’ve embraced all of these these attacks on our founders. You better believe it. And they’ve embraced attacks on our constitutional construct. They’ve embraced attacks on the declaration. We’ve talked about that before. So they really have given birth to the Democratic Socialists of America. That is the the Communists. And they are also quasi communists themselves, to be perfectly blunt about it. So if you really understand this, as you and I do, it’s not really a matter of. Well, there’s this battle within the Democrat Party. There are, in fact, moderates in the Democrat Party. But the Democrat Party as a whole. The leadership of the Democrat Party and so forth and so on. They’ve been a lot more coy than the Democratic Socialists of America. But there is a significant overlap, I would argue significant. Now one of the senior members of the Democratic Socialists of America is this Megan Romer. Now, Mr. Producers reached out multiple times to the Democratic Socialists of America, and we’ve been unable to get Megan Roemer or any one of their other senior people on this program. And the reason is simple, and I don’t pat myself on the head. I understand communism. I understand socialism. I understand the Constitution and I understand what they’re doing. And to really do a deep dive with these people would do would be to expose these people. Ms.. Host can’t do that because that’s that’s not their mindset. I have spent my whole life studying it and writing about it and so forth and so on. But here she is. Megan Romer, DSA, one of the senior people there on Fox News Sunday. Cut one, go. Okay. So we’re going to put up on the screen a few of the things that are part of your platform. And I want to ask you, just give me sort of a true or false on these. Abolish the Senate. True. Okay. Replace the presidency and Supreme Court as we now know them. Yep. Abolish ICE. Absolutely. Abolish borders and give amnesty to anyone currently in the US illegally as a long term plan. Yep. Defund the Pentagon? Absolutely. Abolish prisons, at least in large part. Yeah. Again, as part of a long term program. Yeah. Okay. So no prisons, government or public ownership of most large corporations? Yeah, absolutely. Okay, so then let’s go back through some of those, then abolish the Senate. There are people who are in the Senate now who are very supportive of the. I say they lose their seats. Well, the Senate is an anachronistic institution and it comes from the British House of Lords. It is made to protect power for. Let’s hold right there. The Senate does not come from the British House of Lords. The Senate was created not because of the British House of Lords has not through the British House of Lords. The British House of Lords? No. The Senate was made to ensure that smaller states with smaller populations had a say in the government. But they wouldn’t have voted for the Constitution. They wouldn’t have been part of the Union. And yet some of these smaller states with smaller populations are big states with smaller populations are crucial to this nation. Even today, oil producing states, food producing states and so forth and so on. And so the notion was we’ll have a bicameral Congress, not a parliament. And the direct election of individuals, which in fact the founders of this republic feared to some extent because of mobocracy and factions. I was just for the House of Representatives. The Senate was chosen by the state legislatures or however the state legislatures would decide to choose them. And then, of course, with a president that’s chosen not just through people voting, but through an electoral college, again, to ensure that all states have a say, not just the most populous states with the most populous metropolitan areas. It’s all quite a brilliant, brilliant setup. And so when they say, yeah, the Senate is anachronistic, that is it. You know, we have elections around here. The point of the Senate was to ensure not that we have elections around here are not that everybody gets a vote. It was to ensure that, first of all, we could form a union. And secondly, smaller states have a say in the national government through the Senate. Because they don’t have much of a say through the House of Representatives. It’s that simple, actually. Quite brilliant. Go ahead. Senate was part of the the the system that was made to make sure that the people didn’t have too much of a say. So we want to be right there has nothing to do with the people not having much of a say. For the reason I just said. They wanted to make sure people in like today, Delaware, people in Rhode Island, two of the 13 original colonies, or today people in Wyoming and Minnesota. And North Dakota. And South Dakota. People in Arizona and New Mexico. All kinds of states that have very minimal populations. They wanted to make sure that they had some say. And so it’s quite the opposite of what she says. It ensures that all citizens have some form of say in their federal government. It’s to ensure that the states have some kind of stay in their federal government. Go ahead significantly, but make it a unicameral. Mm hmm. If we met a unicameral. As I’ve explained many times before, basically you’d have 12 states, some count, 14, where each one of the 14 states which control everything. That’s it. So the whole point of having states and federalism, so forth would cease to exist, which is really what they’re about. They want centralized power, centralized decision making. They simply want to plow through with factions and majorities. And that does not protect your civil liberties, that does not protect your property rights. That simply does not protect all citizens of the country. More when I return.

Segment 3
Steve Kornacki of Meet the Depressed. Well, he took a look at some numbers, including Fox News numbers and he said this socialism thing, which is really a communism thing if people are honest about it. It flies okay in the Democrat Party, but independents want nothing to do with it. And it’s funny because last week I spent a lot of time telling Republicans, you need to run on this. You need to compare ideas. You need to explain what we stand for and explain who they are and what they stand for, because it’s actually worse than socialism. And they need to explain that this is a war on the Constitution and that it’s not just they’re communists, it’s the Democrat Party. But I’m not hearing it very well, to be perfectly honest with you. Cut to go. Republicans think that their one chance is the image of the Democratic Party we’ve been seeing in the primary season. Socialists winning Democratic primaries, candidates from the far left. And look at this year among Democrats. This is that Fox poll, a majority have a favorable view of socialism. Step outside the Democratic Party. It’s a totally different world. Look at independents. Socialism, deeply unpopular there. So is that a vulnerability for Democrats that would keep them from capitalizing on Trump’s obvious weaknesses here? Look, more specifically at the two chambers here, Senate side. This if you’re a Democrat, this is the particularly tough one. They need a net gain of four seats to get control of the Senate. Take a look at the map here. How would they get four? Four is their target number. First thing, they can’t lose ground. Georgia, New Hampshire, Michigan, Democratic seats, big primary coming up in Michigan in a few weeks there, they could have general election implications. Democrats have to win those just to not lose ground. Then the two Republican seats they think they have the best shot at would be Susan Collins and me. Democrats have a new candidate there now. And in North Carolina, where Democrats have nominated the former governor there, the close state in 2010. If they do that, they still need two more. Mm hmm. Okay. But this, quote unquote, socialism, which is actually communism. You know, here’s a deal, America. I had trouble getting. My fellow broadcasters in conservative media, on cable and radio and elsewhere to use the word Marxism. Then I wrote my book, American Marxism. Everything you’re seeing now is in that book. Everything. And when you combine it with my last book on power, you know the whole thing. People are making up new names like what is one of them is. Post liberalism or something like that. I don’t know what it is, but it’s it’s we’re familiar with this sort of stuff. We’re familiar with this sort of stuff. It’s sort of Huey Long, Pat Buchanan, pseudo conservatism they used to call paleo conservatism, which is fine. It’s not technically correct, but they did not to get in the weeds. But we know these entities. We know what they’re saying. It’s not new. It’s been going on a long time. I’ve been around a while. So many of you, we’ve heard this crap before. We have to defeat it. Just because there’s new faces, a new politicians, even on our side pushing this stuff. They’re going to lose general elections for us. So we have to do everything we can to fight them. But the independents see of eight out of ten independents who want nothing to do with socialism. Nothing. And yet, basically the Democrat Party has been a Socialist party since Franklin Roosevelt, to be perfectly honest with you. Pretty much has it just that it’s a radical, radical entity now. And it’s more than just socialism, it’s communism. And that doesn’t mean there aren’t still moderate Democrats out there. There are. But the truth is, the Democrat Party is not their home anymore. It’s simply not. Who? John Fetterman. He’s actually a moderate. I don’t agree with him on everything, but I like him very, very much. He was on Fox News Saturday about Socialist cut three go. Sanders really made his impossible to win and he promoted him Platner. And then after those terrible things started to emerge, defended that he pushed for and dismissed that. So and then when it exploded, I have never heard him just say, well, maybe I should just sit this out. Criminal hearings going on there. There is on that screen. He’s going to Michigan now. They’re going to try to elect someone that’s been incredibly anti-Israel and essentially anti-American in a way. So socialism, you know, that should be the unacceptable view. You know, in the Democratic Party, we all should be capitalists and we should all agree that supporting Israel. But overall, but for me, calling them out, there’s also been kind of like a double standard. People, whether it’s it Sanders or other people, they’re allowed to criticize Democrats and they can even create mass chaos like in the Maine race and other thing. But when I just I call out the extreme ones, then that’s when I have I get the criticism and I get that 700% right, isn’t he? He got an entire movement trying to swallow what’s left of the Democrat Party. And they’re not criticized in the kind of way that Fetterman is who’s trying to. Hold on to the Democrat Party, quite frankly. Hakeem Jeffries on CNN yesterday. What about him and his party? And where do they stand? Cut for go? Well, we want to make sure that we are solving problems on behalf of the American people, and that’s in every possible area. It is clear that what unites Democrats, for instance, we forcefully have been pushing back against the one big, ugly bill and the effort to enact the largest. Hey, stop right there, please. Nobody knows what that means. By the way, just as a practical matter, what does that mean? We’re pushing against the one big, ugly bill that’s Washington talk. Now that one big Washington bill. Excuse me, is a beautiful bill. Because it has significant tax cuts in there for, quote unquote, working people. Yes, it does. Why do I sarcastic about where all working people, all of us who have jobs or businesses or whatever we’re working. We’re working. And as I’ve again talked about before, for the Democrats, working people are people to control, to torment, to tax, to push around in the most aggressive forms of communism, to lock up to torture and to kill. So you get 100 million dead under communism working people. But nonetheless, go ahead. Aid in American history. That’s a disgrace. And clearly, that needs to be reversed. We need to make sure that we do things like extending the Affordable Care Act tax credits so that more than 20 million people actually can have health care that they can afford. I don’t I don’t know what that means and neither does anybody else. Obamacare is what he’s talking about, the Affordable Care Act, but he won’t call it Obamacare. They used to call it that. They used to be proud of it. Every Democrat voted for it. Every Republican voted against it. And what it did is it drove up drove up your medical costs through the roof. It also lowered the standard of medical care for people who get Obama care. So we have a lower standard. You’ve got a lot that is not covered. Your prescription drugs are more important under Obama. More expensive, I should say, under Obamacare. And it has taken the entire health care market. It is massively. Increased its expense. So what he’s saying there is we need more subsidies. We shouldn’t get rid of it. We want more. He says Tax credits. Tax credits so more people can afford it. That’s not going to fix anything. That’s not going to fix anything. They need to start from scratch. But he won’t do it. He simply won’t do it. Go ahead. Go to them as opposed to the situation that they confront right now because of MAGA extremist policies. Which is that MAGA extremist policies. Obamacare is in place. MAGA extremist policies. They went ahead and voted to help subsidize it over a short period of time as they as they debate the benefits and problems with it. So there’s no magic extremist policies affecting Obamacare and the the cost that is created, the expense that is created for health care. So go ahead. Brands dramatic increases in their health insurance premiums, in some cases more than $1,000. And there’s dramatic increases because of Obamacare, the so-called Affordable Care Act. Look, we’ve talked about this before. When the Democrats give a name to something, it’s the opposite. So the Affordable Care Act is the Affordable Care Act, like the Department of Education is actually the Department of Health literacy. The Department of Energy’s, the Department of No Energy. And I can go on and on and on. So when they keep talking about the Affordable Care Act, the Affordable Care Act, the Affordable Care Act, you got people who are paying more than $1,000 a month on premiums, and you do that because of Obamacare. Go ahead. It certainly is the case, as we’ve already demonstrated unanimously on the House floor, that we need to stop this reckless and costly war of choice that has skyrocketed gas prices on everyday Americans. So when we have skyrocketing gas prices on everyday Americans again. And I’ll repeat this because people come and go. The average price for a regular gallon of gasoline. Even reached its peak under Biden at $5 and 12 or $0.13 a gallon. That’s before you get into these huge gasoline taxes, particularly in blue states like California, Massachusetts, New York and Illinois. And they had no problem with it because they were doing it for climate change. Climate change. And so the president. Takes us into Iran to prevent that regime from getting nuclear weapons because Biden didn’t. Biden subsidizes their nuclear weapons program. We’ve talked about that. Obama paved the way for their nuclear program. We’ve talked about that. Now, my view on what’s going on in Iran, I will discuss later in the next hour or three. I am not sure why we keep tapping the gas, the brakes, but we’re tapping the brakes yet again. But nonetheless, that for a different Obama. Go ahead. Stop The Trump tariffs, which have increased costs on everyday Americans by the Trump, have had almost no impact on costs. That’s the truth. To my shock, quite frankly. But the fact of the fact they’ve had almost no impact on costs. And most of them were lifted as a result of the Supreme Court ruling. But there are other ways to impose tariffs and tariffs like punishment on these other countries. But they’ve had almost no impact on the cost of goods, quite frankly. Then they say to Hakeem Jeffries, you know, what about you and Bernie Sanders? You’re clashing on these ideas and so forth and so on. Again, I want you to understand, America, the clash is not that big. I mean, other than a guy like Fetterman and a few others. The clash is not that big. Cut five, Go. I wouldn’t describe it as a clash. It was a candid conversation along with Congressman Greg Meeks to chair the Congressional Black Caucus PAC with respect to one particular race in North Carolina. At the beginning of the primary cycle and trying to get a sense of his approach to that race, I do think that Senator Sanders and Democrats in both the House and the Senate understand the stakes that are in front of us, particularly as we are 100 days out, and that’s making sure that we actually take back control of the Congress. So why, why, why, why should they take back control of Congress? What do they want to do? What’s their plan? Don’t tell me to reduce the price of fuel because they jacked up the price of fuel. Don’t tell me to fight inflation. Inflation is way down, and it skyrocketed under them. Don’t tell me it’s to secure our border. Since they not only did not secure our border, they opened it wide and we’re still dealing with the horrendous ramifications of that. What is it that they plan to do? Attack the cops. Attack ICE. This is what they do best. What exactly will they do? Massive new spending. Massive new debt. What will the Democrats do? Oh, I forgot. They want to pack the Supreme Court. They want to get rid of the Electoral College. Sounds like the communists to me. Oh, they got all kinds of plans. That will not benefit any single one of you. It will empower them. I’ll be right back.

Segment 4
Bernie Sanders. Here’s a true Stalinist, a real commie. He’s on always on these Sunday shows. He’s always on the cable shows. It’s not like he won’t come on this show. AOC won’t come on this show. None of them will come on this show. The Democratic Socialists of America. They won’t come on the show, none of them. But Bernie is on all these shows. And he’s on Face the Nation. And here’s what he has to say. Cut sex. Go. You are confident that with your endorsements, these other candidates have been fully vetted? Well, look, I think look, you know, there are hundreds of candidates. I don’t know who has been, quote unquote, fully. Well, you just mentioned the candidates. Well, all I know is, Margaret, that the candidates that we are supporting are standing up for the working class of this country. And at a time when so many people are just they’re standing up for the working class of this country, destroying the tax base, destroying private property and homeownership. Destroying the food supply chain like Madame he’s now doing in New York, destroying the little bodegas and little businesses that are competing. Massive tax increases across the board. The guy had promised free public transportation. Now that hasn’t happened. That hasn’t happened. He promised affordability. There’s no affordability there. New York, It’s the same as it was before he got there. Except now you get the five calls to a Muslim or whatever it’s called Islam. To pray. I guess it is. But nonetheless, these guys are all talk all talk a lot of action. But it’s action. It is very devastating. The working class. We’re for the working class. No, you’re not for the working class. Go ahead. Guards beat the scourge, whether you’re Republicans, Democrats, independents, about a dollar, the a rigged economy, but a corrupt campaign. First of for the economy is not rigged. If you’re having a problem in your life, it’s not because the economy is rigged. It’s because maybe you’ve taken the wrong path. Maybe you should back up a little bit, maybe get a different type of education, maybe learn a trade, something like that. Nobody’s handed anything. Nobody. I mean, these guys want you to believe that the problem is the system. It’s not the system. Capitalism is the greatest system on the face of the earth. How do I know? Because most of us eat. Most of us have clothing. Most of us have running water. That’s how I know. I’ll be right back.