Sometimes, I truly envy the New York Times. From a privileged perch high above the rest of us mere mortals, the Times constantly informs us of what's happening in America - from their perspective, at least.

Of course, they are oblivious to the real America. But don't tell them that. They wouldn't believe you anyway.

Case in point; the Times believes that a few socialists running in far left liberal communities is proof that America is ready for a socialist wave and that the future belongs to the far left.

Rather than shy away from being called a socialist, a word conservatives have long wielded as a slur, candidates like Mr. Bynum are embracing the label. He is among dozens of D.S.A. members running in this fall’s midterms for offices across the country at nearly every level. In Hawaii, Kaniela Ing, a state representative, is running for Congress. Gayle McLaughlin, a former mayor of Richmond, Calif., is running to be the state’s lieutenant governor. In Tennessee, Dennis Prater, an adjunct professor at East Tennessee State University, is running to be a county commissioner.

Supporters, many of them millennials, say they are drawn by D.S.A.’s promise to combat income inequality, which they believe is tainting every facet of American life, from the criminal justice system to medical care to politics. They argue that capitalism has let them down, saddling them with student debt, high rent and uncertain job prospects. And they have been frustrated by the Democratic Party, which they say has lost touch with working people.

Yes, it's capitalism's fault that an individual takes on hundreds of thousands of dollars in student loan debt. They are forced at gunpoint to sign the loan papers. And high rent in big cities - caused by socialist policies enacted by far left Democrats - is capitalism's fault too.

The ability of young people to delude themselves is constantly amazing to me.

Outrage over rising inequality has simmered for years, erupting into the Occupy Wall Street movement and the groundswell of support for Senator Bernie Sanders, a self-described democratic socialist. But it was the election of Mr. Trump that convinced tens of thousands that both parties were broken and that the country was in need of a radical fix.

The New York Times, which had daily updates on the Occupy movements around the country, can't seem to grasp that the "movement" is deader than a doornail and was never, ever about "income inequality.

The Times, Senator Sanders, or any other socialist never mentions how this income equality is to be achieved. Simply taxing the rich won't nearly be enough. There will be confiscation and, along with it, the possible jailing of people who won't part with their property. That's how it has happened in every other socialist takeover of a government in history. Why should America be any different?

It's true, both parties are broken and in need of radical fixes. But the question on both the left and the right is do the parties "reform" by moving farther to the extremes or would it be more prudent to move back to the center? Partisans, activists, and ideologues from both sides, who are gaining more control of the parties as time goes by, would almost universally prefer to move further toward "pure" conservatism or liberalism. If that happens, socialism and fascism will be entrenched in American politics with very little hope for free government.

The Times is wrong. There aren't enough millenials to effect a socialist revolution and in the overwhelming majority of the country, "socialism" isn't a "slur"; it is simply despised as un-Amercan.

The Times would know this if their reporters ever ventured beyond the island of Manhattan.