Republican groups are recirculating a snippet of Michigan Democratic U.S. Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed talking about the public regulation of private corporations, arguing that his remarks signal an endorsement of communism.
“Says he is in favor of a communist-style government seizure of private companies,” declared the Republican National Committee in an August 12 post on X.
The message featured a brief 16-second excerpt from what appears to be a podcast appearance. In the audio, the interviewer asks, “Are you in favor of public ownership models like the one Bernie introduced?”
El-Sayed replies, “So, I want to actually take it a step further. I agree that we need public ownership, but I also agree that we need some system of public control. Like, what is the point of democracy if it’s not to protect us from existential risk?”
🚨NEW
Michigan Democrat Abdul El-Sayed says he is in favor of a communist-style government seizure of private companies.
HOST: “Are you in favor of public ownership models?”
EL-SAYED: “I want to actually take it a step further…we need some system of public control.” pic.twitter.com/zUBHUdZtFm
— RNC Research (@RNCResearch) August 12, 2026
According to Ronald Suny, an emeritus professor of history and political science at the University of Michigan, traditional communism relies on total state ownership of all industry and heavily centralized economic planning.
Reviewing the complete conversation reveals that El-Sayed’s comments did not advocate for such a system.
The full 50-minute recording from the June 12 segment of the “Head in the Office” podcast shows that his remarks were strictly focused on the artificial intelligence sector. While discussing tensions with Iran, El-Sayed criticized Donald Trump’s foreign policy actions, arguing that resulting spikes in energy costs could destabilize the major AI infrastructure that Trump backs.
El-Sayed went on to explain that, if elected to the Senate, he would push for strict federal conditions on the construction of data centers.
El-Sayed: If you’re going to build these things, union labor and all the jobs you said you’re going to provide. Number two, you cannot increase our electrical costs. Number three, you need to invest revenue in improving reliability and improving our grid. Number four, do not touch our water. Number five, there must be a community benefits agreement that is negotiated in good faith. And number six, we can shut you down if you don’t do this shit right.”
The phrases highlighted in the RNC advertisement appeared shortly after, emphasized here in bold:
Host: “Are you in favor of public ownership models like the one Bernie introduced?”
El-Sayed: “I want to actually take it a step further. I agree that we need public ownership, but I also agree that we need some system of public control. Like, what is the point of democracy if it’s not to protect us from existential risk? And right now there is no regulation. And these super PACs are rendering AI potentially unregulatable into the future. You got two AI super PACs that are going to play in this race. For whom? Guess who?”
Host: “And they’re among the biggest spenders these days.”
El-Sayed: “$100 million super PACs. So one’s playing for one of my opponents, the other one’s playing for the other opponent.
Host: “Oh, really? I haven’t even heard about this.”
El-Sayed: “So big AI is already working to try and render this unregulatable. So I just think it’s really important for us to be thinking, what is democratic control over this industry? What does it look like? And I’m not the only one saying — like Dario Amodei, who’s the CEO of Anthropic, kind of came to the conclusion himself, that at some point we’re going to need public ownership of this. Because it’s just too big and just too dangerous. And so, you know, whether that means, like, public representation on boards or a public oversight body over all of these corporations, I just think this is potentially existential both for the social contract and for like existential risk itself, right?”
Regarding this exchange, a previous investigation by PolitiFact looked into El-Sayed’s assertion that AI-backed super PACs were pouring heavy financial support into opposing his primary campaign in Michigan, but found no evidence of major AI-focused committees backing his primary rivals.
Furthermore, while El-Sayed aligns with U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders on proposing government stakes in technology firms, this concept is not strictly limited to progressive politicians.
Donald Trump has previously expressed interest in similar approaches, with his administration discussing potential arrangements to secure government equity in AI enterprises, as noted in reports by NOTUS. Executives like OpenAI CEO Sam Altman and Anthropic’s Amodei have also floated frameworks allowing the public to benefit from the sector’s financial upside.
Additionally, Trump helped broker a deal in 2025 granting the U.S. government a 10% stake in chipmaker Intel, converting unpaid CHIPS Act grants into billions of dollars worth of stock.
When pressed for proof that El-Sayed’s ideas constituted communism, RNC representative Hunter Lovell countered that the candidate’s platform mirrors a “radical socialist agenda.”
“Whether it’s demanding public control of private AI companies or eliminating private health insurance through Medicare for All, El-Sayed has made abundantly clear that he wants government bureaucrats controlling every aspect of Americans’ daily lives,” Lovell stated.
An AI-funded sovereign wealth fund
Sanders has proposed that Washington acquire a 50% equity stake in major artificial intelligence corporations to back a national sovereign wealth fund, financed by a one-time stock levy.
Unlike voluntary investment models or direct federal purchases using tax revenue, this strategy functions as a mandatory transfer of shares from existing investors to the federal government.
Elizabeth Anderson, a philosophy professor at the University of Michigan, noted that this mechanism differs from typical state-run enterprises because it is structured as an uncompensated tax. While she described it as potentially resembling expropriation and raised constitutional questions, she maintained that it does not qualify as communism.
El-Sayed’s technological strategy backs Sanders’ legislation while introducing tighter rules. He advocates for requiring top AI firms to operate as public benefit corporations, meet specific safety thresholds, and ensure that a majority of their board positions are publicly appointed or democratically elected.
Campaign spokesperson Roxie Richner emphasized to reporters that El-Sayed does not favor overarching state control of private business, targeting AI specifically due to its foundation on public data and its unique societal impact.
“Any suggestion that giving the public decision-making power over their own property and existential risk over the future is communism is not consistent with a baseline understanding of American civics or economics,” Richner said.
Is it a communist takeover?
While the platform calls for substantial intervention in the domestic economy, analysts agree it falls short of communism.
Experts suggest that terms like state capitalism or democratic socialism are far more accurate descriptions of El-Sayed’s proposals.
Traditional socialism involves widespread public control over economic production and a reduced footprint for private capital. In the American context, democratic socialism typically advocates for shifting major industries and large corporations into public hands through legislative reform rather than revolutionary upheaval.
Although El-Sayed enjoys endorsements from high-profile democratic socialists such as Sanders and Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, he has declined the label, instead describing himself as a capitalist who favors strict government oversight of big business.
“State capitalism refers to state participation in the ownership of vital resources or those that are relatively new and require in the public interest a degree of state control lest their owners engage in activities that are harmful to public safety, security and sanity,” explained Lewis Siegelbaum, a history professor at Michigan State University.
Such arrangements are commonplace throughout Europe and exist in select sectors within the U.S., according to scholars. For example, the Norwegian government holds a controlling share in energy giant Equinor and channels investments through a massive sovereign wealth fund. Numerous European nations maintain full or majority ownership over transportation, telecommunications, and aviation.
Similarly, publicly managed utilities, transit networks, and research institutions are ordinary features of American infrastructure.
“These are all islands of socialism within a capitalist society,” Suny remarked regarding public utilities. “When they were originally proposed, at the end of the 19th century, beginning of 20th century, they were condemned as socialist.”