The Blaze79%

‘Need a cop? Thank socialism’ is dumb  but dangerously effective 81%

By Ben Boychuk92%

7/19/2026, 7:00:00 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 42 faulty reasoning types, including Ad Hominem, Biased Writer Voice, and Straw Man, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 39.2% saturation with 381 hits. Analysis detected 2,088 faulty-reasoning hits from 971 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 72.7% and a BS Rank of 81% (4,182 of 21,887 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 80.90% of the article peer group.

Zohran Mamdani ran a brilliant campaign last year by promising to make New York City affordable through democratic socialism. 
Now the bill is arriving. 
Firefighters are good. 
Firefighters are socialism. 
Therefore, socialism is good. 
That is the intellectual caliber of the movement now ascending in American politics. 
New York’s new pied-à-terre tax took effect this month. 
Almost immediately, the luxury real estate market tanked . 
Wealthy buyers, it turns out, are not livestock. 
They can delay purchases, move money, change residency, or simply decline to participate in Mamdani’s experiment. 
This elementary fact appears to have surprised the people running America’s largest city. 
That’s the trouble with democratic socialists. 
They are forever astonished when human beings refuse to behave like figures in a budget projection. 
Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison has a solution: Make the argument so stupid that nobody can discuss socialism seriously at all. 
Appearing recently on “The Dean Obeidallah Show,” Ellison announced that police departments are socialist because taxpayers fund them. 
“You call the cops; guess who pays them. 
Your tax dollars,” Ellison said. 
“Guess what that is. 
That’s socialism, pal!” 
He threw in fire departments, water inspectors, and public works for good measure. 
No, pal. 
That isn’t socialism. 
That’s just government . 
Ellison wasn’t offering a forensic definition, of course. 
He was performing a cheap semantic trick for people he assumed would nod and applaud before thinking. 
Police are socialism. 
Firefighters are socialism. 
Roads are socialism. 
Public schools are socialism. 
( Well, yes, kind of. 
) Once every government function becomes socialist, socialism no longer requires a defense. 
You already support it. 
You have no choice. 
Unless you plan to extinguish your own house fire, arrest your own burglar, and pave the road yourself, welcome to the revolution. 
Joe Rogan has been repeating the same dumb line for years, I’m sorry to say. 
Last year , he again called the fire department socialist because everybody pays for it and everybody receives protection. 
I like Rogan. 
He isn’t a malefactor like Ellison. 
He simply does not know what he is talking about. 
That is less wicked, but it is increasingly difficult to excuse in a man who has spent thousands of hours interviewing people who actually know things. 
Millions hear Rogan and think: Well, gosh, that makes sense. 
No, it doesn’t. 
It’s flat wrong. 
Worse, Ellison and Rogan smuggle in the same fraudulent choice: socialism or chaos. 
Either government employs police officers and firefighters, builds roads, and inspects drinking water, or every citizen must hire his own private constable, buy his own fire engine, and fill the pothole at the end of the driveway. 
That is not the choice. 
RELATED: The media’s Democratic cover-up is collapsing 
Socialism concerns ownership and control of productive property. 
Government collects taxes, enforces laws, maintains courts, fields armies, and provides services. 
Governments did all of those things long before socialism acquired a name. 
By the Ellison-Rogan standard, if we can call it that, every king who collected taxes was a socialist. 
Ancient Rome was socialist because it built aqueducts. 
George Washington and Alexander Hamilton were socialists because the national government employed customs agents. 
Louis XIV was apparently waiting for the workers to seize Versailles. 
The alternative to socialism is not anarchy. 
It is limited government. 
Conservatives sometimes make the mistake of talking as though government itself were the enemy. 
It isn’t. 
Not necessarily. 
Bad government is the enemy. 
Unlimited government is the enemy. 
Government that exceeds its legitimate purposes , devours private institutions, and treats citizens as dependents is the enemy. 
But we need government. 
We need cops and firefighters. 
We need courts, armies, roads, and public works  the odd toll road notwithstanding. 
Somebody must enforce contracts, punish violence, defend the country, and preserve public order. 
Ordered liberty requires order . 
The American political tradition does not reject government. 
It recognizes that government is necessary and dangerous and therefore must be limited by law . 
That is a much older and more serious idea than the facile view that every tax-funded service is socialism and every objection to socialism is an argument for anarchy. 
Ellison knows better. 
That’s what makes him a bad guy. 
He understands perfectly well that a police department is not socialism. 
He chooses to speak as though he does not because the confusion serves him. 
If cops and firefighters are socialism, then socialism is already as American as apple pie . 
No need to defend rent controls, wealth taxes, government grocery stores, confiscatory tax schemes, or the steady expansion of public power on their merits. 
Just offer the child’s syllogism: Firefighters are good. 
Firefighters are socialism. 
Therefore, socialism is good. 
That is the intellectual caliber of the movement now ascending in American cities. 
RELATED: ‘Back the blue’ cannot mean blind obedience 
Fort Worth Star-Telegram/Tribune News Service/Getty Images 
Ellison is dishonest about words because dishonesty serves his politics. 
Rogan is careless with ideas because being laughably wrong has never reduced his audience. 
Mamdani is careless with markets because he imagines moral righteousness repeals the law of supply and demand. 
These are not serious people. 
But they are seriously dangerous. 
They hold offices, microphones, audiences, and influence wildly disproportionate to their judgment. 
They confuse applause with vindication and slogans with thought. 
They speak with total confidence because none of them expects to pay for being wrong. 
The people who do pay are homeowners, renters, workers, employers, customers, and taxpayers who cannot laugh, wave, and leave the consequences to somebody else. 
Democratic socialism’s new champions are not merely wrong about economics. 
They are frivolous about power. 
They offer socialism or chaos because admitting the existence of limited government would ruin the con. 
They are playing with cities and states they are not wise or disciplined enough to govern. 
Shine, perishing republic! 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.8%Ben Boychuk: 1.5%Blaze Media: 5.6%Confirmation Bias0.8%This article: 0.0%Ben Boychuk: 0.3%Blaze Media: 0.7%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 4.4%Ben Boychuk: 1.5%Blaze Media: 3.2%Availability Heuristic4.4%This article: 1.6%Ben Boychuk: 1.0%Blaze Media: 1.0%Representativeness Heuristic1.6%This article: 1.8%Ben Boychuk: 0.4%Blaze Media: 0.8%Hindsight Bias1.8%This article: 2.6%Ben Boychuk: 1.3%Blaze Media: 1.6%Overconfidence Bias2.6%This article: 1.6%Ben Boychuk: 9.0%Blaze Media: 9.6%Framing Effect1.6%This article: 0.4%Ben Boychuk: 0.2%Blaze Media: 0.5%Loss Aversion0.4%This article: 1.2%Ben Boychuk: 0.4%Blaze Media: 0.5%Status Quo Bias1.2%This article: 1.3%Ben Boychuk: 0.2%Blaze Media: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect1.3%This article: 0.0%Ben Boychuk: 2.2%Blaze Media: 1.7%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 1.3%Ben Boychuk: 1.7%Blaze Media: 1.6%Pessimism Bias1.3%This article: 39.2%Ben Boychuk: 17.3%Blaze Media: 9.8%Negativity Bias39.2%This article: 0.3%Ben Boychuk: 0.0%Blaze Media: 1.4%Self-Serving Bias0.3%This article: 8.0%Ben Boychuk: 1.8%Blaze Media: 1.1%Fundamental Attribution Error8.0%This article: 2.7%Ben Boychuk: 0.4%Blaze Media: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias2.7%This article: 2.9%Ben Boychuk: 2.5%Blaze Media: 2.7%In-Group Bias2.9%This article: 0.0%Ben Boychuk: 0.4%Blaze Media: 1.5%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 2.3%Ben Boychuk: 0.8%Blaze Media: 2.6%Halo Effect2.3%This article: 0.0%Ben Boychuk: 0.0%Blaze Media: 0.4%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.8%Ben Boychuk: 0.5%Blaze Media: 0.1%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.8%This article: 2.9%Ben Boychuk: 1.8%Blaze Media: 1.1%Recency Bias2.9%This article: 3.0%Ben Boychuk: 0.7%Blaze Media: 0.5%Primacy Effect3.0%This article: 0.0%Ben Boychuk: 0.1%Blaze Media: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 30.8%Ben Boychuk: 12.5%Blaze Media: 2.6%Ad Hominem30.8%This article: 12.7%Ben Boychuk: 3.7%Blaze Media: 1.2%Straw Man12.7%This article: 3.5%Ben Boychuk: 0.9%Blaze Media: 3.7%Appeal to Authority3.5%This article: 12.5%Ben Boychuk: 6.9%Blaze Media: 2.4%False Dilemma12.5%This article: 2.3%Ben Boychuk: 1.8%Blaze Media: 1.5%Slippery Slope2.3%This article: 1.8%Ben Boychuk: 0.4%Blaze Media: 0.1%Circular Reasoning1.8%This article: 8.7%Ben Boychuk: 9.4%Blaze Media: 8.9%Hasty Generalization8.7%This article: 2.9%Ben Boychuk: 0.8%Blaze Media: 0.8%Red Herring2.9%This article: 1.0%Ben Boychuk: 0.5%Blaze Media: 0.9%Bandwagon1.0%This article: 7.6%Ben Boychuk: 11.8%Blaze Media: 8.2%Appeal to Emotion7.6%This article: 4.3%Ben Boychuk: 1.8%Blaze Media: 1.5%Begging the Question4.3%This article: 3.2%Ben Boychuk: 1.2%Blaze Media: 2.5%Post Hoc (False Cause)3.2%This article: 0.0%Ben Boychuk: 0.1%Blaze Media: 0.2%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Ben Boychuk: 0.1%Blaze Media: 1.0%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Ben Boychuk: 0.2%Blaze Media: 0.3%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 1.9%Ben Boychuk: 1.0%Blaze Media: 0.3%Composition/Division1.9%This article: 1.0%Ben Boychuk: 0.4%Blaze Media: 2.6%Anecdotal1.0%This article: 0.0%Ben Boychuk: 0.3%Blaze Media: 0.2%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 7.8%Ben Boychuk: 3.1%Blaze Media: 2.0%Ambiguity (Equivocation)7.8%This article: 0.0%Ben Boychuk: 0.0%Blaze Media: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.5%Ben Boychuk: 0.1%Blaze Media: 0.1%Middle Ground0.5%This article: 0.0%Ben Boychuk: 0.0%Blaze Media: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Ben Boychuk: 0.0%Blaze Media: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 1.2%Ben Boychuk: 0.2%Blaze Media: 0.3%Genetic Fallacy1.2%This article: 1.9%Ben Boychuk: 2.7%Blaze Media: 2.8%Unattributed Quote1.9%This article: 1.6%Ben Boychuk: 0.8%Blaze Media: 2.2%Quote-first Misdirection1.6%This article: 19.7%Ben Boychuk: 17.5%Blaze Media: 10.6%Biased Writer Voice19.7%This article: 4.6%Ben Boychuk: 7.7%Blaze Media: 4.5%Indoctrination4.6%This article: 1.4%Ben Boychuk: 0.5%Blaze Media: 0.4%Politically Left Leaning Bias1.4%This article: 0.0%Ben Boychuk: 2.9%Blaze Media: 7.0%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 2.9%Ben Boychuk: 1.0%Blaze Media: 2.6%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…2.9%

971 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers2.7%attributed speech945writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 100.0% coverageKeith Ellison • 8 words • 100.0% coverageKeith Ellison • 5 words • 0.0% coverageKeith Ellison • 4 words • 0.0% coverageKeith Ellison • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 37 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 29 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageFort Worth Star-Telegram/Tribune News Service/Getty Images • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 100.0% coverage
Selected voice

Keith Ellison

55%flagged-word coverage
20 attributed words77% of attributed speech90% writer coverage
0%20.0%40.0%Quote-first Misdirection+39.2 ptsWriter: 0.8%Keith Ellison: 40.0%40.0%Biased Writer Voice-20.2 ptsWriter: 20.2%Keith Ellison: 0.0%0.0%Indoctrination-4.8 ptsWriter: 4.8%Keith Ellison: 0.0%0.0%Attempt to Sell a Product -3.0 ptsWriter: 3.0%Keith Ellison: 0.0%0.0%Unattributed Quote-1.9 ptsWriter: 1.9%Keith Ellison: 0.0%0.0%Politically Left Leaning B-1.5 ptsWriter: 1.5%Keith Ellison: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.