Senator Elizabeth Warren has been struggling to reignite the spark that propelled her campaign earlier in this election cycle. The Massachusetts Senator famously has a “plan” for nearly everything. Her campaign website outlines 53 different plans, and she frequently hints at developing even more. These plans address everything from gender and race relations to foreign policy, from economic improvements to immigration reform.

However, so far, those “plans” aren’t swaying primary voters. Senator Bernie Sanders has reclaimed the mantle Champion of the Far-Left which Warren once held for a short time. As she’s declined in the polls and a growing number of primary victories are going to Sanders, Warren’s presidential aspirations are steadily losing traction.

But that doesn’t mean she is an irrelevant political figure. Warren’s policies are still worth studying—especially since many of her policies resemble those of Bernie Sanders, simply by a different name.

Unlike Sanders, Warren glosses over her radical socialist agenda by using language that make her policies sound less Marxists.

David L. Bahnsen, a successful author and television commentator, recently wrote a book on the dangers of Warren’s policy prescriptions, warning of how these policies would harm the middle-class Americans that Warren claims to want to help. In his book Elizabeth Warren: How Her Presidency Would Destroy the Middle Class and the American Dream, Bahnsen addresses Warren head-on by picking her proposals apart one by one.

The book is a refreshing break from ad hominin attacks and focuses exclusively on policy differences. If only our national political discourse were elevated to such a level.

Bahnsen begins his critique of the Massachusetts senator by tracing her ideological journey from a Republican to a wealth-hating Leftist. Many people might not realize that Warren was once on the Right and acted like a sensible, independent thinker.

Before she wanted to eliminate private charter schools and nationalize every aspect of education, she supported vouchers for parents to send their kids to a school of their choosing. She wrote a book titled “The Two-Income Trap,” in which she argued that the increase in female employment actually had some negative impacts on families by driving up the cost of many essential goods due to the increased income that the wives generated for households. That argument wouldn’t sit well with feminists if she campaigned on that platform.

Bahnsen wrote that Warren claimed that “the vast increase of two-income families in recent decades served to inflate the cost of living for middle-class families (as the price of housing, education, automobiles, and other consumer goods rose with the new-found financial capacity to pay for them), yet this same dynamic stripped families of a basic protection single-income families had historically enjoyed.”

Fast forward to today, and Warren has done a complete 180 on this and many other issues. She now sounds like a female version of Karl Marx with her class warfare rhetoric. Bahnsen adroitly articulated the same point when he wrote, “Warren has created an entire policy framework and an entire campaign message around left-wing populism. At its core, left-wing populism is class warfare. And at its core, class warfare is the core ingredient of Marxian ideology.”

Warren first came to the attention of the public when she helped found the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, which was an added layer of unnecessary government overreach and negatively impacted financial institutions and consumers by raising the cost of financial transactions.

Bahnsen also explains how the financial regulations served to harm small businesses and communities as much, if not more, than the behemoth banks: “The cost of compliance amounts to a lower percentage of revenue for big firms than it does for small players, who may not have such access or resources at any cost, and even if they do, may find their very existence threatened by regulatory burdens.”

Chapter by chapter, Bahnsen picks apart Warren’s erroneous views on environmental regulations, healthcare for all, and wealth taxes.

The book is worth a read for those who want to understand Warren and progressivism as a whole. I hesitate to call her and her supporters as progressives—a better term would be “regressive,” as their policies would roll back the progress achieved by capitalism and return us to a less prosperous, less free country.

If Elizabeth Warren has her way, that’s what will happen.

But thanks to the efforts of writers like Bahnsen, she won’t accomplish that easily.