The $80 Trillion Heist: Is America an Oligarchy? A Deep Dive into Bernie Sanders’ Viral X Post

Published on Boncopia.com | May 5, 2025

Introduction: A Shocking Claim Goes Viral

On April 28, 2025, Senator Bernie Sanders dropped a bombshell on X that reignited a fiery debate about wealth inequality in America. His post, which has since garnered thousands of reactions, claimed that nearly $80 trillion has been redistributed from the bottom 90% to the top 1% since 1975. Sanders called this a symptom of an “oligarchy” where big money controls both political parties, leaving everyday Americans sidelined. But is he right? And why did his post spark such a heated backlash? Let’s break it down.

The Post That Started It All

Sanders’ X post at 14:30 UTC on April 28, 2025, was paired with an image of a news interview and a caption that read:
“The American people are not dumb. They understand that when the top 1% owns more wealth than the bottom 90%, that when big money interests are able to control both political parties, they are living in an oligarchy.”

He linked to a video clip, but the real meat of his argument came from a March 2025 RAND Corporation report he’d previously highlighted. The report found that $80 trillion in wealth had shifted from the bottom 90% to the top 1% over the past 50 years. Sanders argued this inequality isn’t just unfair—it’s a direct threat to democracy.

The Data: What’s Behind the $80 Trillion Claim?

The RAND report, published on March 4, 2025, paints a stark picture. Since 1975, wealth inequality in the U.S. has skyrocketed. If income inequality had stayed at 1975 levels, the median household income today would be double what it is. Instead, the top 1% have amassed unprecedented wealth, while the bottom 90% struggle to keep up. Sanders tied this to political power, arguing that the elite use their wealth to influence both parties, creating what he calls an “oligarchy”—a system where a small group holds disproportionate power.

This isn’t a new critique for Sanders, but the $80 trillion figure gave his argument fresh urgency. Former President Jimmy Carter’s 2015 comment, calling the U.S. an “oligarchy with unlimited political bribery” post-Citizens United v. FEC, echoes Sanders’ view. Scholars like Jeffrey A. Winters and Benjamin I. Page have also described the U.S. as an oligarchy, pointing to the concentration of wealth and political influence among a tiny elite.

The X Backlash: Supporters vs. Critics

The post exploded on X, drawing both fierce support and sharp criticism. Here’s a snapshot of the reactions:

• Supporters Rally Behind Sanders @thegeekreborn

  wrote, “THIS. Please, everyone who reads this, understand he’s 1000% right. You may be conservative, you may be liberal, but neither corporate party serves YOU—not anymore.” This sentiment reflects a growing frustration with the political establishment, a key theme in Sanders’ long career.

• Critics Call Out Hypocrisy @SaltyGoat17 fired back, “You’re part of the top 1%, comrade. Do you really think people don’t understand that?” Others, like @matt_vanswol, were more direct: “YOU OWN 3 HOUSES AND FLY AROUND IN PRIVATE JETS!!!!!!!!!! YOU ARE A FREAKING FRAUD AND I DO NOT TRUST YOU!!!!!!” The accusation of hypocrisy stems from Sanders’ personal wealth, estimated at $2.5 million in 2020, and his ownership of three homes, which critics say clash with his anti-wealth rhetoric.

• Big Pharma Allegations Debunked @DonnaPrissyrn1 shared a chart claiming Sanders took millions from Big Pharma, but a February 2025 STAT investigation debunked this. Since 2016, Sanders has accepted no donations from pharmaceutical PACs or executives, even returning contributions over $200 from such sources during his 2020 presidential run. The chart likely misrepresents donations from rank-and-file pharma employees, not executives.

• Oligarchy or Exaggeration? @ThomasPainejr1 dismissed Sanders’ use of “oligarchy,” saying, “Much like the ‘N word’, you have thrown the word ‘oligarchy’ around so much that nobody listens to your idiotic Marxist rants anymore.” Others, like @XVanFleet, turned the term back on Sanders, claiming he’s part of a “5-percent oligarchy.”

Is Sanders a Hypocrite?

The hypocrisy charge is a common attack on Sanders. Critics point to his three homes—a D.C. residence, a Burlington, Vermont, house, and a vacation home on Lake Champlain—as evidence that he’s part of the elite he critiques. A Quora post explains this disconnect: detractors often misunderstand democratic socialism, equating it with a rejection of all personal wealth. Sanders has never advocated for equal wealth distribution but rather for equal opportunity and a system where the wealthy don’t dominate politics. His homes, while a symbol of privilege, don’t negate his policy goals, like taxing the ultra-rich to fund healthcare and education.

What Is an Oligarchy, Really?

Sanders’ use of “oligarchy” isn’t just rhetoric. The term, from the Greek “rule by few,” describes a system where power concentrates in a small group, often distinguished by wealth, as per a Wikipedia entry updated on April 28, 2025. In the U.S., the top 1%’s wealth ($47.1 trillion in 2024, per Federal Reserve data) and political influence (via donations and lobbying) fit this mold. The 2010 Citizens United ruling, which allowed unlimited corporate political spending, further tilted the scales, as Carter noted.

The Bigger Picture: Democracy at Risk?

Sanders’ core argument—that extreme inequality undermines democracy—has data to back it up. The RAND report shows how wealth concentration has eroded the middle class, while political donations from the ultra-rich (e.g., $1.4 billion from the top 50 donors in 2024, per OpenSecrets) amplify their influence. This creates a feedback loop: the rich get richer, gain more political power, and push policies that benefit them, like tax breaks for billionaires, which Sanders claims Republicans are planning.

But critics argue Sanders oversimplifies the issue.

@ValentinaForUSA tweeted, “You have been in politics almost 50 years with multiple Democratic presidents, and you have done nothing for the hard-working Americans.” This raises a fair question: if the system is so broken, why hasn’t Sanders, a career politician, fixed it?

Engaging Readers: What Do You Think?

Sanders’ post forces us to confront uncomfortable truths about wealth, power, and democracy in America. The $80 trillion figure is staggering, but the debate it sparked reveals deeper divides. Is Sanders a hypocrite for living comfortably while railing against inequality? Or is he a rare voice calling out a system that’s rigged against the majority?

Here are a few thought questions to ponder:

• Do you believe the U.S. is an oligarchy, or is Sanders exaggerating the influence of the top 1%?

• Can a wealthy politician like Sanders authentically advocate for the working class, or does his lifestyle undermine his message?

• What’s one policy you’d support to address wealth inequality in America—higher taxes on the rich, campaign finance reform, or something else?

Let us know your thoughts in the comments below—we’d love to hear from you!