The Appeal of Socialism

Democrats must reckon with their approach to inequality

“Let me tell you about the very rich. They are different from you and me.”

– F. Scot Fitzgerald published his short story “The Rich Boy” in 1926. His most famous work, The Great Gatsby, turned 100 this year. It was originally published in 1925.

The Wealth Chasm

Many people in our society are angry over wealth inequality. It’s a legitimate issue for those running for office to address. The Bezos wedding in Venice, Italy, almost seemed designed to inflame this anger.

The chart below shows that the bottom twenty percent of households in Minneapolis earn an average of $13,349, whereas the top twenty percent earn $286,801. The highest earners are making 2148% more than the lowest. The situation worsens if you focus on the top 5%; they are earning an average of $520,744 per household.

The Minneapolis DFL and many of its endorsed candidates have decided that landlords are to blame for the city’s housing problems. In doing so, they overlook real progress that has been made and downplay other challenges like the rising cost of construction and interest rates. Developers are often cast as villains, despite being essential to expanding the housing supply. If they’re driven out, who will build the homes and apartments the city needs?

Omar Fateh defines himself as a renter, right after being a State Senator and husband. He promotes, “A city that lifts up working people is a city that lifts up everyone.” The implication is that his opponents are actively opposing unions, even though many races have union endorsements split between candidates.

Party More

Minneapolis is effectively a one-party city. If there were more viable parties, we might see less strain within the Minneapolis DFL. Rather than constant infighting, voters could compare competing platforms across distinct parties with differing visions.

Instead, we get internal battles. State DFL Chair Richard Carlbom tried to define the party as a “big tent” in his opening convention remarks—but that message has become harder to maintain since the Minneapolis DFL endorsed Omar Fateh for mayor.

Fateh’s endorsement highlights a growing divide. On one side are those who align with a democratic socialist vision—believing that “socialism is the fight for true democracy” and that capitalism is a “barbaric order” to be overcome. On the other are those more pragmatic: they want to reduce inequality, but they’re skeptical of efforts to remake city government with ideological ambition and symbolic gestures. They’d prefer a city that prioritizes public safety, reliable services, and a transportation network that doesn’t make a cross-town trip feel like an experiment in carless utopia.

Many try to frame the divide as rich versus poor, renter versus owner, or biker versus driver. For us, the more useful division is between those unbending in their idealism and those who expect our leaders to be realistic about what city government can accomplish.

Food Fight

On July 16, the City Council received a report it had requested on the feasibility of municipal grocery stores. In the coming months, we’ll examine several campaign-trail proposals that may sound appealing but turn out to be far more complex than they first appear. We’re starting with grocery stores, prompted by a thoughtful New York Times piece outlining the many obstacles these initiatives face.

A few key challenges stand out:

• Retail space: How will the city pay for and maintain store locations?

• Logistics: Who manages warehousing and distribution to ensure fresh food arrives on time and in the right quantities?

• Inventory decisions: Should vegetarians subsidize meat? Should the city sell sugary drinks and processed foods that contribute to diabetes and cancer? A public food committee may be needed to sort it all out.

• Shoplifting: How will theft be handled—an issue that’s been problematic for stores like Walgreens, Target, and other retailers?

City Council Member Robin Wonsley argues that the city must “get creative” to address food deserts: “We know the private market is not meeting the needs for all residents across the city.” But Minnesota Grocers Association President Patrick Garofalo counters that municipal stores would create unnecessary competition for small businesses and be costly: “It’s going to be expensive, and the City of Minneapolis just doesn’t have the money to be doing this right now.”

What’s troubling about the way these topics are discussed is how quickly disagreement—or even basic skepticism—can be met with accusations: racist, anti-worker, or aligned with big business and landlords. These kinds of reflexive attacks shut down honest debate and make it harder to build consensus for meaningful change.

There’s room for a serious conversation about how best to address hunger and expand access to fresh food in Minneapolis. The discussion might include Hennepin County, which already administers a number of food assistance programs.

A city-run grocery system would likely face many of the same challenges as private grocers. Before committing to a multi-year initiative that the city may be ill-equipped to manage, it’s worth exploring more practical alternatives.

Modern Politics Isn’t So Modern

Politicians making promises they can’t keep in order to win elections is hardly new. In 1925, the same year The Great Gatsby was published, the post-World War I mood was captured in the slogan: “A Chicken in Every Pot and a Car in Every Garage.” It reflected the belief that Americans were owed prosperity after the war.

Nearly a century later, much has changed—but not the slogans. What’s different now is how precisely political messages can be targeted. Through social media and digital advertising, candidates can repeat simplistic promises to the audiences most likely to respond to them, over and over again.

Better Minneapolis will spend the coming months examining some of the promises made during this election cycle. Our goal isn’t cynicism—it’s curiosity. Can the people asking to lead this city deliver what they say they will? What are the trade-offs they’re not discussing?

At least half the city’s residents appear disengaged from local politics. They rarely read the news or listen to candidates. That disconnection is often rooted in disappointment—from hearing too many promises with too little follow-through. When candidates venture outside the party delegate pool, they’ll likely hear what we’ve heard before:

“You only come around during elections. The rest of the time, you don’t care.”
“It doesn’t matter who’s on the council or in the mayor’s office—my life isn’t going to change.”

A fractured Minneapolis DFL is unlikely to inspire these voters. What might? Leaders who acknowledge the city’s real problems—and are honest about the trade-offs their policies will require.