Jul 11, 2026 · 1 hr 26 min · 11 segments
OpenAI is offering 5% equity to the US government. Trump has ordered the creation of a US sovereign wealth fund, received 10% government equity in Intel, and a “golden share” in US Steel. Now Bernie…
James HughesHost
One wants the government stakes in AI companies because he wants his name on the deed to everything.
One wants to buy regulatory freedom and federal buy-in with a high-profile bribe that can be spun politically.
The debate over AI nationalization isn't really about whether the state should own a piece of the machine.
Nearly everyone across the spectrum agrees that it should, or already does through equity stakes and procurement and R&D subsidies.
The real fight is over what kind of ownership, governed by whom and toward what end, a sovereign wealth fund that pays dividends, a nationalization that redirects surplus into public goods, an ad hoc portfolio of golden shares run out of the Oval Office, or an institutionalized, individualized basic capital scheme that never asks anyone to act collectively at all.
It's good to be here.
So this is a surprising pass for two lefties like us because we have been in the trenches for a while arguing for democratic socialism, but finally we have an administration who is just... creating a democratic social, purportedly democratic socialist instruments left and right, forcing companies to partially nationalize themselves, Intel 10 percent and U.S. Steel, a golden share, a dozen other companies, and also has directed the creation of a sovereign wealth fund.
So now that Bernie has entered the picture with his proposal, we need to talk about that and how it relates to Trump, what Trump is doing, and why OpenAI and companies like OpenAI are advocating for partial nationalization or giving away ownership to the state.
So what's your first take on why we're at this impasse, this sudden socialist turn of public policy?
One wants the government stakes in AI companies because he wants his name on the deed to everything.
One wants to buy regulatory freedom and federal buy-in with a high-profile bribe that can be spun politically.
The debate over AI nationalization isn't really about whether the state should own a piece of the machine.
Nearly everyone across the spectrum agrees that it should, or already does through equity stakes and procurement and R&D subsidies.
The real fight is over what kind of ownership, governed by whom and toward what end, a sovereign wealth fund that pays dividends, a nationalization that redirects surplus into public goods, an ad hoc portfolio of golden shares run out of the Oval Office, or an institutionalized, individualized basic capital scheme that never asks anyone to act collectively at all.
It's good to be here.
So this is a surprising pass for two lefties like us because we have been in the trenches for a while arguing for democratic socialism, but finally we have an administration who is just... creating a democratic social, purportedly democratic socialist instruments left and right, forcing companies to partially nationalize themselves, Intel 10 percent and U.S. Steel, a golden share, a dozen other companies, and also has directed the creation of a sovereign wealth fund.
So now that Bernie has entered the picture with his proposal, we need to talk about that and how it relates to Trump, what Trump is doing, and why OpenAI and companies like OpenAI are advocating for partial nationalization or giving away ownership to the state.
So what's your first take on why we're at this impasse, this sudden socialist turn of public policy?
The rest of this transcript — segmented and speaker-labeled, so you land on the exact moment something was said
Search every transcript — by keyword, by phrase, or by meaning, across every show Radar indexes
Trends — what is surging across podcasts, measured against its own baseline
Alerts — when a name you follow appears in a newly indexed episode
No account is needed to search Radar.