Faulty reasoning signals

• Confirmation Bias - 5.3% (79 hits)
• Anchoring Bias - 0%
• Availability Heuristic - 5.7% (85 hits)
• Representativeness Heuristic - 9.3% (140 hits)
• Hindsight Bias - 0%
• Overconfidence Bias - 1.6% (24 hits)
• Framing Effect - 6.5% (98 hits)
• Loss Aversion - 0%
• Status Quo Bias - 5.6% (84 hits)
• Sunk Cost Effect - 0%
• Optimism Bias - 0%
• Pessimism Bias - 8.9% (134 hits)

Article text

Socialism, communism, and Marxism: A guide to the ideologies behind the ‘blue scare’

Republicans have increasingly portrayed Democratic Socialists of America-backed candidates as evidence of a broader ideological shift as those candidates notch victories in Democratic primaries.

President Donald Trump has repeatedly referred to New York socialist candidates as communists, and House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) has warned that Marxist ideology is becoming more influential inside the Democratic Party.

Other Republicans and political commentators have also referred to socialist candidates with the same distinctions.

A slew of socialist victories in recent Democratic primaries has sent a ripple of fear through both major political parties, with “socialism,” “communism,” and “Marxism” being thrown around in equal measure, but how is each defined?

One family tree

Modern socialism, Marxism, and communism all trace their origins to the writings of 19th-century German philosopher Karl Marx and his collaborator, Friedrich Engels.

Marx argued that capitalism concentrated wealth among owners while exploiting workers.

He believed that history advanced through conflict between economic classes and predicted that capitalism would eventually give way to socialism before ultimately reaching communism.

Eric Patterson, president and CEO of the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation, said Marxism is best understood not simply as an economic theory but as a comprehensive worldview.

“Marxism is a — it’s a worldview,” Patterson told the Washington Examiner.

“It’s an ideology, and what I mean by that is they have a theory for everything.

They’re not saying we just explain economics.

They say we explain politics, economics, human anthropology, the meaning of life in the universe, everything.

They’re a fully fledged ideology.”

Patterson said that Marx envisioned socialism as an intermediate stage in a broader historical process.

“We’re going to change socio-political systems from old agrarian feudal systems to a modern capitalist system, then to a socialist system where government takes over all of the economic parts of life, and then over time, government will take over all parts of civic life, and that is communism,” Patterson said.

In Marx’s writings, communism represented the final stage of society: a classless, stateless system without private ownership of the means of production.

Modern experts, however, generally distinguish between Marx’s theoretical writings and the many forms that socialism has taken over the past century.

Today’s socialist candidates typically advocate expanding labor protections, strengthening unions, increasing public spending on housing and healthcare, and reducing economic inequality through elections rather than revolution.

Communism, meanwhile, has become associated with governments that claimed to pursue Marx’s vision, including the Soviet Union, Maoist China, and Cuba.

That distinction helps explain why politicians often disagree over terminology.

Socialists in 2026 generally reject being described as communists, arguing they support constitutional democracy and competitive elections.

Republicans frequently counter that socialism and communism exist on the same ideological continuum because Marx himself described socialism as a transitional stage.

Why Republicans make the connection

For critics of DSA-backed candidates, the concern is not simply over individual policy proposals but what they see as the broader direction of government.

Patterson said the United States’ constitutional system was intentionally built around limited government, individual liberties, and gradual political change through elections and checks and balances.

“Our constitutional order is rooted in individual liberties that include freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of conscience, the right to private property, and a healthy distrust of a large state,” Patterson said.

He contrasted that with Marx’s theory, which he explained places increasing authority in government as society moves toward communism.

“It’s hard to imagine every part of life should be controlled and regulated by government — that is communism,” Patterson said.

The argument is not necessarily that the DSA advocates a Soviet-style government, but many of the candidates supported by the organization back policies rooted in the same intellectual tradition that Marx believed would eventually replace capitalism.

“They want to use the state … in very, very aggressive ways,” Patterson said.

Trump has repeatedly claimed that socialist candidates tack on “democratic” to soften how voters receive their platform.

“These are not social democrats, these are hardcore, godless communists,” the president said at the Faith & Freedom Coalition’s 2026 policy conference last month.

“This is the most serious threat to our country since its existence, in my opinion, 250 years ago.

This is a major threat to our country.”

Where today’s candidates overlap

Although socialist candidates reject authoritarian communism, many advocate policies long associated with Marxist philosophy.

One of the clearest examples is the economy itself.

The Democratic Socialists of America says on its website that it seeks to “collectively own the key economic drivers that dominate our lives, such as energy production and transportation.”

The organization also states that “working people should run both the economy and society democratically to meet human needs, not make profits for a few.”

Patterson said those goals reflect one of the central ideas found in Marx’s writing: shifting greater economic power away from private ownership and toward collective or public control.

Housing has become perhaps the movement’s defining issue.

Claire Valdez, a DSA-backed candidate who recently won a Democratic primary for Congress in New York, has campaigned on the belief that “housing is a human right,” calling for social housing, stronger tenant protections, and greater public investment in affordable housing.

Other DSA-backed candidates have similarly argued that housing should be treated as a public good rather than primarily a private commodity.

Labor policy provides another common thread.

The DSA platform calls for stronger labor unions, sectoral bargaining, expanded worker ownership, and publicly owned utilities.

Many candidates backed by the organization have also supported higher taxes on corporations and wealthy Americans to fund expanded government.

Patterson said those proposals mirror Marx’s belief that capitalism inevitably concentrates wealth among a small ownership class.

“Socialists are often saying, ‘You know what, you are oppressed, older people are taking things from you, you deserve more.

We’re going to take it from them and give it to you,’” Patterson said.

“That’s what’s been appealing about these socialists, is using a Marxist lens, which is always: There’s an oppressor, and there’s an oppressed.”

Foreign policy has become another point of distinction.

Following Hamas’ Oct. 7, 2023, attack on Israel and the ensuing war in Gaza, the DSA endorsed the “boycott, divestment and sanctions” movement, called for ending U.S. military aid to Israel, and organized demonstrations supporting Palestinian rights.

Several DSA-backed candidates who won recent Democratic primaries, including Melat Kiros, have echoed calls to end U.S. military assistance to Israel.

Kiros has publicly stated that the Oct. 7 attack was “an inevitable consequence of apartheid, of occupation, decades of occupation.”

She has framed the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks the same way, saying there were an “inevitable” consequence of U.S. foreign policy.

Republicans and several Jewish organizations have argued that some rhetoric emerging from anti-Israel demonstrations has crossed into antisemitism.

Socialist candidates generally reject that characterization, saying their criticism is directed at the Israeli government rather than Jewish people.

Patterson said Marxist thought has historically viewed organized religion as another institution that reinforces existing power structures.

“Socialists, they are typically anti-religion,” Patterson said.

“Socialists are going to see religion as hierarchical, as patriarchal, as superstitious … because they see religion as regressive, they see it as holding women down, they see it as justifying holding people down.”

Why experts see socialism finding new audience

As DSA-backed candidates continue winning Democratic primaries, another question has emerged alongside debates over ideology: Why is socialism gaining traction now after decades on the political fringe?

Patterson believes generational and cultural shifts have made younger voters more receptive to ideas that call for a larger government role in daily life.

He argued that younger Americans have grown up in an era of social media, where privacy is less valued, and have become accustomed to technology that delivers immediate results.

“The older generation always valued privacy, and knew that democratic government doesn’t work very fast, but that’s because it’s limited by checks and balances and federalism, and that protects individual rights,” Patterson said.

“[Younger generations] are used to zero privacy due to the social media era and the way people have kind of lived the Kardashian lifestyle [with] zero privacy.”

He also argued that many young adults have entered the workforce during a period marked by rising housing costs, student debt, and inflation, making messages centered on economic inequality more politically attractive.

Patterson also pointed to changes in education, arguing that schools have increasingly emphasized the U.S.’s historical failures rather than its constitutional principles.

“We need to explain what we’re for: individual liberties, fundamental human rights, democratic processes, the free market,” he said.

Whether the recent string of socialist primary victories marks a lasting political realignment or a temporary response to economic frustration remains to be seen.

But as Republicans increasingly invoke the language of Marxism and communism to describe the movement, and the DSA continues to reject the labels, the debate over where those ideologies intersect and diverge is likely to remain a defining feature of U.S. politics.