Socialism vs Communism: What Is the Difference?

The short answer

Think of socialism as the big family and communism as one branch of it.

Socialism covers a wide range of views that share one idea: the economy should serve everyone, so major industries and resources should be owned or controlled socially rather than by a small class of private owners. Socialists disagree on almost everything else, including whether to keep markets, how big the state should be and how to get there.

Communism has two meanings. In theory, it is the endpoint Karl Marx described: a society with no classes, no private ownership of the means of production and, eventually, no state. In practice, it usually refers to the one-party Marxist-Leninist states that ruled the Soviet Union, Eastern Europe, China and others.

Britannica puts the relationship plainly: communism is a form of socialism, and where exactly the line falls is "a matter of debate." It notes that the distinction rests largely on communists' commitment to the revolutionary socialism of Marx.

Where the two words came from

Both words spread in the early nineteenth century, as factories, cities and an industrial working class grew across Europe. Early socialists like Robert Owen and Henri de Saint-Simon proposed cooperative communities and planned production as answers to poverty and exploitation.

Marx and Friedrich Engels chose the word "communist" for their 1848 Communist Manifesto, partly to set themselves apart from what they saw as the softer, utopian socialism of their day. Even so, Britannica notes that Marx, like most nineteenth century writers, tended to use the two terms interchangeably.

The modern distinction comes from two texts.

Marx's two phases

In his 1875 Critique of the Gotha Programme, Marx described two stages after capitalism. In the first phase, society "has just emerged after prolonged birth pangs from capitalist society," so people would still be paid according to the work they contribute. Only in a higher phase, once production had grown and the old division of labor had faded, could society follow the principle:

"From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs!" (Karl Marx, Critique of the Gotha Programme)

Lenin's labels

In The State and Revolution (1917), Lenin gave those two phases the names we still use: "What is usually called socialism was termed by Marx the 'first', or lower, phase of communist society." So, in the Marxist-Leninist vocabulary, socialism is the transition and communism is the destination. That is why the Soviet Union called itself the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics: its rulers said they were building socialism on the way to communism, not that communism had arrived. See communism vs Marxism and communism vs Leninism.

Key differences

Because socialism is so broad, the clearest comparison is between communism and the democratic forms of socialism that most self-described socialists hold today.

Ownership

Communists aim for common ownership of essentially all means of production, and in the end the abolition of private property in productive assets. Democratic socialists usually want public or worker ownership of major industries, utilities and services, while leaving room for small businesses and personal property. Market socialism keeps markets but makes firms worker owned or publicly owned. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy notes that market socialism "retains from capitalism the utilization of markets to guide production."

The state

In Marxist theory, the state is a tool of class rule and should eventually "wither away." In practice, communist parties built powerful states to run the economy and suppress opposition, saying this was necessary for the transition. Democratic socialists see a democratic state as the main tool for reform and do not expect it to disappear.

How change happens

Communists in the Leninist tradition held that capitalism would not give up power peacefully, so revolution led by a disciplined vanguard party was needed. Socialists in the tradition of Eduard Bernstein argued for "evolutionary" socialism: winning elections, building unions and reforming capitalism step by step.

Distribution

Under Marx's first phase, and under most socialist proposals, people are paid according to their work. Only full communism promises distribution according to need.

Side by side

Social democracy is a further step away from both. Social democracy accepts a market economy with mostly private ownership and adds a large welfare state, strong unions and regulation. It grew out of socialist parties but no longer aims to replace capitalism. See social democracy vs socialism and democratic socialism vs social democracy.

Socialism and communism in practice

The twentieth century tested both ideas on a large scale.

Communist states. After the Russian Revolution of 1917, the Bolsheviks built a one-party state, nationalized industry and, under Stalin, collectivized agriculture and introduced five-year plans. After 1945, communist parties took power across Eastern Europe, and in China in 1949, followed by North Korea, Vietnam, Cuba and others. Supporters point to rapid industrialization, mass literacy and the defeat of Nazi Germany. Critics point to famines, labor camps, mass repression and the lack of political freedom. Most of these regimes collapsed or turned to markets between 1978 and 1991, a period that included the reforms associated with Mikhail Gorbachev.

Democratic socialist and social democratic parties. In Western Europe, parties with socialist roots won elections and built welfare states, nationalized some industries and expanded public healthcare. In Britain, Clement Attlee led the Labour government that founded the National Health Service. In Sweden, social democrats such as Olof Palme governed within a market economy. In the United States, Eugene V. Debs ran for president five times as a socialist.

Many of the sharpest critics of Soviet communism came from inside socialism. Rosa Luxemburg warned in 1918 that the Bolsheviks were suppressing democracy, and George Orwell, a democratic socialist, wrote Animal Farm and Nineteen Eighty-Four as warnings about totalitarianism.

The case for each

In their own best terms:

The socialist case. Capitalism concentrates wealth and power in a few hands and leaves workers with little say over their own lives. Democratic control of the economy, through public ownership, cooperatives, unions and a strong welfare state, can secure decent lives for everyone without giving up elections or civil liberties. Reform through democracy is both more legitimate and more durable than revolution.

The communist case. Reforms within capitalism are partial and can always be reversed by those who own the economy. Only abolishing class itself can end exploitation. A society of abundance, where people work according to ability and receive according to need, is the fullest form of human freedom. Communists also argue that the failures of past states reflected war, backwardness and siege, not the ideal itself.

Criticisms

From the right and from free-market economists

Economists such as Ludwig von Mises and Friedrich Hayek argued that without market prices, planners cannot know what to produce or how, which leads to waste and shortages. Hayek's The Road to Serfdom (1944) argued that central planning concentrates power and tends toward tyranny. Conservatives and libertarians often add that socialism weakens incentives, property rights and personal responsibility, and that communist states show where the logic leads.

From democratic socialists and the wider left

Many socialists reject the Soviet model as a betrayal of socialism rather than its fulfillment. They argue that one-party rule turned "workers' states" into bureaucratic dictatorships. Anarchists and libertarian socialists go further and argue that any strong state, socialist or not, will create a new ruling class.

From communists, aimed at social democrats

Communists and some radical socialists argue that social democracy only manages capitalism instead of replacing it, and that welfare gains can be cut back whenever business interests regain power.

What Americans think

The words carry different weight in different places. In the United States, "socialism" is often used broadly, sometimes to describe any expansion of government. In Europe, socialist and social democratic parties have been part of mainstream politics for over a century.

Pew Research Center found in August 2022 that 36% of US adults had a positive view of socialism, down from 42% in 2019, while 57% viewed capitalism positively, down from 65%. The split by party was wide: 57% of Democrats and Democratic leaners viewed socialism positively, compared with 14% of Republicans and Republican leaners.

Find where you fit

You may lean socialist if you think key industries and services should be run for public benefit, and lean communist if you think only abolishing private ownership entirely can end inequality. Most people hold some mix, and many reject both in favor of markets.

The quickest check is the Left or Right quiz. For a full picture, take the Political Compass Test, which separates economic views from views on state authority, the very line that divides democratic socialists from Marxist-Leninists. The 12 Axes Political Test goes further and matches you with ideologies such as democratic socialism, Marxism and Leninism. You can also browse our list of political ideologies or read left vs right politics.