By Max Ganorkar
Raleigh, NC – rowing up in socialist India, I witnessed firsthand what happens when government gradually replaces the free market. If North Carolinians don’t wake up to the spread of socialism in our state, they will experience the same oppressive government I escaped.
In North Carolina there are six Democrat Socialist of America Chapters in strategic areas of the state and five Young Democratic Socialists of America chapters. In Congressional District 4, where I’m running, we have several elected officials and candidates who are DSA endorsed, such as NC Sen. Lisa Grafstein and Town of Cary Councilwoman Carissa Kohn-Johnson.
Socialist-backed candidates in North Carolina aren’t just running anymore — they’re winning, and they’re now making decisions for our state. As an immigrant, I’m sounding the alarm.
When I immigrated to the United States in 1989, one of the greatest cultural shocks of my life was walking into an American grocery store, Shaw’s in Hooksett, New Hampshire. The shelves were overflowing with fresh food, there was tremendous variety, and consumers enjoyed choices that many people living under socialist economies could only dream about.
I came to appreciate that America’s abundance was not an accident; it was the result of economic freedom, private enterprise, competition, and innovation. That experience is why proposals for government-run, subsidized grocery stores deeply concern me.
Socialism rarely arrives by announcing food shortages or rationing. It arrives wrapped in promises of affordability, fairness, and helping the poor. Those are noble goals, but history has repeatedly shown that government control over markets often produces unintended consequences.
When government begins competing with private businesses using taxpayer subsidies, many privately owned grocery stores struggle to survive. Some close their doors, while others desperately search for ways to cut costs just to stay in business. In countries where corruption is already taking root, that pressure can lead some businesses to adulterate food with inferior ingredients or unsafe substitutes.
Regulators and food inspectors, who are supposed to protect the public, may begin accepting bribes and looking the other way. Corruption that starts with a single dishonest inspector rarely stays there. It gradually spreads through the bureaucracy until it reaches the highest levels of government, creating a system where political influence matters more than public safety.
Government monopolies also tend to grow larger with time. Every new program creates additional departments, administrators, regulations, paperwork, and oversight. Instead of reducing costs, bureaucracy expands, bringing with it more opportunities for fraud, waste, abuse, and inefficiency. Food, unlike manufactured goods, cannot wait. Fresh produce, grains, dairy products, and meat spoil quickly. When decisions are delayed by bureaucracy or when middlemen fight over contracts and political favors, food often sits in government warehouses until it rots. Meanwhile, the very people those programs were intended to help find empty shelves where food should have been.
As government-subsidized stores offer artificially low prices, shoppers naturally flock to them. Demand quickly exceeds supply, shortages become common, and governments often respond with rationing rather than allowing markets to correct the imbalance. At the same time, government control gradually expands beyond distribution and begins influencing production itself. Private investment declines because businesses cannot compete against taxpayer-funded enterprises. Legitimate manufacturers then find themselves competing against counterfeit and illegal producers who exploit weak enforcement, further compromising food safety and public health.
I don’t have to imagine what rationing looks like; I lived it. My family had a government-issued ration card. As a young boy, I would ride my bicycle to the government ration store in our neighborhood and stand in line, often before the store opened, to buy our monthly allotment of sugar, cooking oil, kerosene, and other essential items. The quantities were fixed by the government, regardless of our family’s changing needs.
During festivals or family celebrations, when we needed a little extra sugar or other essentials, there was only one way to get it; people quietly bribe the government store contractor in hopes that he would sell unaccounted-for supply.
That black market did not appear out of nowhere. It thrived because goods leaked out of the government-controlled distribution system through theft, diversion, fraud, and corruption. Every step along the way, from local store operators to bureaucrats and politically connected officials, created opportunities for someone to take a cut before the food ever reached ordinary families.
In the end, the promises of socialism frequently give way to fewer choices, declining quality, chronic shortages, and preferential treatment for those who are politically connected. Ordinary citizens wait in longer lines with fewer options, while those with influence somehow always seem to find what they need. America’s remarkable abundance of food did not happen by chance. It was built through generations of farmers, truck drivers, manufacturers, wholesalers, retailers, entrepreneurs, and consumers participating in a competitive free-market system.
Those experiences shaped my understanding of socialism more than any textbook ever could. That is why I become concerned whenever I hear proposals for government-controlled grocery stores or greater government control over food distribution. I have seen how systems that begin with promises of fairness and affordability can, over time, create shortages, corruption, rationing, and a thriving black market.
As someone who has lived under socialism and then experienced the extraordinary abundance of America, I hope Americans will never take that freedom for granted. I’ve been there. I’ve seen that. My hope is that Americans never have to endure what Indians had to under socialism.
India today is vastly different from the India I left in 1989. Over the past few decades, India has undertaken significant economic liberalization, expanded the role of private enterprise, and reduced many of the controls that once constrained growth.
Under Prime Minister Narendra Modi, India has continued to emphasize initiatives such as reducing regulatory burdens, encouraging entrepreneurship, investing in infrastructure, and promoting private-sector participation. The result is a vibrant, fast-growing economy that stands in sharp contrast to the India of my youth. To me, it reinforces a lesson I learned firsthand: When individuals are given greater economic freedom to innovate, compete, and build businesses, prosperity follows, not just for a privileged few, but for We the People.
Max Ganorkar is an Indian-born immigrant, constitutional conservative, and the 2026 Republican nominee for North Carolina’s 4th Congressional District. Having grown up under India’s socialist economic system before immigrating to the United States in 1989, he offers Americans a rare firsthand perspective on what happens when government control replaces economic freedom.