Amanda Seyfried has never been one to shy away from speaking her mind, and her recent comments about socialism have put her back in the political spotlight. The actress appeared on Variety’s Award Circuit podcast on December 12, 2025, where she called socialism a “gorgeous idea” and defined it as “taking care of each other.” Her remarks came just days after she refused to apologize for calling slain conservative activist Charlie Kirk “hateful” following his assassination in September 2025.
Seyfried was promoting her new film, The Testament of Ann Lee, a musical about the founder of the Shakers, an 18th-century religious movement built around communal living and shared resources, and she drew parallels between the Shaker philosophy and what she sees as missing in modern American society. She argued that people should prioritize caring for one another over political agendas.
Critics accused her of romanticizing an economic system that has historically failed in practice. While others questioned why a wealthy Hollywood actress was lecturing Americans about redistribution. Supporters defended her right to express political opinions. They noted she was describing a personal philosophy rather than advocating for policy change. To understand how we got here, you need to know how this backlash started and why the Charlie Kirk connection made everything more heated.
What Is Socialism?
Socialism is an economic and political system where the community or government owns and controls the means of production. Meaning factories, farms, and businesses that create goods and services. Under socialism, wealth gets redistributed so that resources are shared more equally among citizens rather than concentrated in the hands of private owners.
This stands in contrast to capitalism, the system most Americans live under, where private individuals and corporations own businesses and keep the profits they generate. In a capitalist economy, the market determines prices and wages based on supply and demand. And people accumulate wealth through individual effort and investment.
The term socialism covers a wide spectrum. On one end are democratic socialist countries like those in Scandinavia, where free markets exist alongside strong government programs for healthcare, education, and social safety nets funded by high taxes. On the other end are fully socialist or communist states where the government controls nearly all economic activity. A model associated with the Soviet Union and present-day Cuba or North Korea.
In American political conversation, socialism carries heavy baggage. Conservatives often use it as a warning label for any expansion of government programs. While progressives have tried to reclaim the word to describe policies like universal healthcare or free college tuition. When Seyfried described socialism as simply caring for others and sharing wealth. Critics argued she was using a soft definition that ignores the system’s historical failures and economic consequences. Her description sounds more like charitable giving than the actual restructuring of property ownership that socialism traditionally requires.
What Amanda Seyfried Said on the Podcast
Seyfried’s socialism comments came during a conversation with host Michael Schneider about the state of America. The discussion grew out of her work on The Testament of Ann Lee. Where she plays the founder of the Shakers. She saw a connection between the communal values Ann Lee promoted in the 1700s and what she believes is missing today.
“We’re kicking our own out,” Seyfried said on the podcast. “How about we all don’t have any kind of agendas? How about our agenda is take care of each other? Socialism is a gorgeous idea, and I know it doesn’t work perfectly.”
When Schneider noted that the word socialism carries different meanings depending on who uses it, Seyfried offered her personal interpretation.
“For me, it’s taking care of each other. If I have more money, I can spend more money on other people. Isn’t that right?”
The conversation then turned to national unity, with Schneider bringing up the period after September 11, 2001. Seyfried agreed that the post-9/11 era showed Americans at their best, dropping everything to help one another in crisis.
“Everybody dropped everything for each other. People sacrificed their lives without a thought in the world,” she said. “And we shouldn’t have to have a meteor or a house-on-fire situation in order to drop everything for each other. That’s just what we are as human beings.”
Who Was Charlie Kirk?
Charlie Kirk was a 31-year-old conservative political activist and the co-founder of Turning Point USA, an organization focused on promoting conservative values among young Americans. He built a massive following through social media and college campus speaking tours. Becoming one of the most recognizable faces of the American right and a close ally of President Donald Trump.
On September 10, 2025, Kirk was assassinated while speaking at an outdoor event at Utah Valley University in Orem, Utah. The event was part of his “American Comeback Tour,” which featured his signature “Prove Me Wrong” format, where he argued with students on political issues. Around 3,000 people attended.
A gunman positioned on a rooftop approximately 425 feet away fired a single shot that struck Kirk in the neck. He was pronounced dead at a local hospital, and the suspected shooter, 22-year-old Tyler James Robinson from Washington, Utah, surrendered to authorities the following day. Prosecutors charged Robinson with aggravated murder on September 16 and announced they would seek the death penalty, alleging a politically motivated attack.
Kirk left behind his wife, Erika, and two young children. Utah Governor Spencer Cox called his death a “political assassination,” and President Trump ordered flags lowered to half-staff. Kirk’s killing became the latest in a series of political violence incidents, including attempts on Trump’s life in 2024.
The Instagram Comment That Started the Backlash
Shortly after Kirk’s assassination, screenshots began circulating on social media showing Amanda Seyfried’s Instagram activity. She had commented on a post about Kirk’s death with three words: “He was hateful.”
She also reportedly shared a post that read, “You can’t invite violence to the dinner table and be shocked when it starts eating.” Critics interpreted this as Seyfried implying Kirk’s murder was somehow justified or predictable given his political rhetoric.
The backlash was immediate and fierce, with conservative commentators accusing her of celebrating a man’s death. While some social media users threatened to boycott her films. Kirk’s supporters pointed out that he had left behind a wife and two children. Making her comment particularly insensitive, regardless of political disagreements.
Seyfried responded with a standalone Instagram post attempting to clarify her position.
Her clarification satisfied some critics but left others unconvinced.
Seyfried’s Refusal to Back Down
Three months after her original Instagram comments, Seyfried made it clear she has no regrets. In an interview with Who What Wear published on December 10, 2025, she addressed the backlash head-on while promoting The Testament of Ann Lee.
“I’m not f—ing apologizing for that,” Seyfried told the outlet. “I mean, for f—‘s sake, I commented on one thing. I said something that was based on actual reality and actual footage and actual quotes. What I said was pretty damn factual, and I’m free to have an opinion, of course.”
Seyfried said she considered deleting her original comment but decided against it. Feeling that using Instagram to post her clarification was a way to reclaim her voice after her words had been twisted.
“Thank God for Instagram. I was able to give some clarity, and it was about getting my voice back because I felt like it had been stolen and recontextualized, which is what people do, of course,” she said.
She acknowledged that wading into political territory requires caution. Adding that she has to remember to “keep her head on” when discussing divisive issues. But her refusal to apologize, combined with her socialism comments, has kept her name in political headlines during what should be a straightforward awards season press tour.
The Shakers and The Testament of Ann Lee
Seyfried’s comments about socialism directly connect to the film she’s promoting. The Testament of Ann Lee, directed by Mona Fastvold. Tells the story of Ann Lee, an 18th-century English woman who founded the United Society of Believers in Christ’s Second Appearing, better known as the Shakers.
Ann Lee was born in Manchester, England, in 1736 to a blacksmith’s family. After experiencing the death of all four of her children in infancy, she had religious visions that led her to believe God was punishing her for engaging in sexual relations. She joined a religious group that became known as the Shaking Quakers due to their ecstatic style of worship, and eventually became their leader.
In 1774, Lee and a small group of followers immigrated to America and established a community near Albany, New York. The Shakers practiced celibacy and pacifism, believed men and women were equals, and shared all property communally. They believed in simplicity and hard work, which led them to create furniture and crafts still prized today for their functional beauty.
At their peak in the mid-1800s, around 4,000 Shakers lived in 18 communities across the northeastern United States and Kentucky. Because they didn’t have children due to their celibacy requirements, they relied on converts and adoption to sustain their numbers. The movement declined sharply through the late 19th and 20th centuries, and today only one active Shaker community remains at Sabbathday Lake in Maine, with just a handful of members.
Hollywood’s Split Response to Kirk’s Death
Seyfried wasn’t the only celebrity whose reaction to Charlie Kirk’s death drew attention. The entertainment industry’s response to the assassination was notably mixed. Many public figures are attempting to thread the needle between condemning political violence and acknowledging their disagreements with Kirk’s politics.
Jamie Lee Curtis fought back tears on Marc Maron’s WTF podcast when discussing Kirk. “I disagreed with him on almost every point I ever heard him say, but I believe he was a man of faith, and I hope in that moment when he died, that he felt connected with his faith,” Curtis said. “Even though his ideas were abhorrent to me.” Curtis later faced her own scrutiny when some of her positive comments about Kirk were reported, and she claimed they had been “mistranslated.”
Michael Keaton addressed Kirk’s death at the Investigative Reporters and Editors’ 50th anniversary gala, reminding the audience that, regardless of political differences, Kirk left behind two children and a wife.
Jimmy Kimmel’s response drew the most severe consequences. After he criticized right-wing commentators for trying to “score political points” from Kirk’s murder, his show Jimmy Kimmel Live! was temporarily suspended by ABC and Disney following pressure from the Trump administration. The incident showed just how charged the political environment had become around Kirk’s death and any public commentary about it.
Read More: Internet ‘Detectives’ Zero In on Charlie Kirk and His Wife in Bizarre New Theory
The Ongoing Argument Over Celebrity Political Speech
Seyfried’s backlash arrives at a moment when celebrity political commentary faces intense scrutiny from all sides. Conservative critics argue that wealthy entertainers are out of touch with ordinary Americans. And should stick to their craft rather than lecturing the public about economics and politics. Liberal defenders counter that celebrities have the same First Amendment rights as anyone else. And that their platforms give them opportunities to raise awareness about issues they care about.
The socialism argument in particular touches a nerve in American politics. While Seyfried described socialism as simply caring for others and sharing wealth, critics pointed out that the term carries a specific economic meaning, involving government ownership of production and redistribution policies that have historically led to economic problems in countries that have implemented them. Seyfried herself acknowledged this tension when she said socialism “doesn’t work perfectly.”
Social media reactions ranged from mockery to agreement. Some users pointed out that nothing prevents Seyfried from voluntarily giving away her wealth right now if that’s what she believes in. Others appreciated her willingness to speak openly about her values during a polarized time when many celebrities stay silent on political matters to avoid career consequences.
Seyfried has earned critical acclaim for The Testament of Ann Lee, receiving nominations from the Critics’ Choice Awards and Golden Globes. Whether the political fallout helps or hurts her awards prospects remains to be seen, but she has made clear she won’t let it change what she says publicly.
Read More: Amanda Seyfried Stands Firm on Controversial Remarks About Charlie Kirk