The off-year elections held earlier this month have raised concerns that socialism may be ascendant within the Democratic Party’s mainstream, following the election of self-described socialists Zohran Mamdani as New York City’s mayor and Katie Wilson as Seattle’s.
Mamdani, in particular, was the recipient of numerous endorsements, not just from the Democratic Party’s more vocal progressive wing, but from mainstream Democrats like House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) and Governor Kathy Hochul (D-N.Y.) — although some, like Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), refused to add their names to the socialist’s endorsement list. Now, a new survey is revealing that a majority of Democrats actually hold a favorable view of socialism. The only question is, “What is socialism?”
An Economist/YouGov poll conducted earlier this month (November 7-10) found that most Americans (44%) hold an unfavorable view of socialism, while only a third (33%) view it favorably. Nearly a quarter (23%) said that they weren’t sure of their views on socialism. Among Republicans, a predictable 70% hold an unfavorable view of socialism (including 62% with a “very unfavorable” view of the ideology), while a plurality (44%) of Independent voters also view socialism unfavorably, compared to only 27% who view socialism favorably. Among Democrats, however, a staggering 62% reported that they view socialism favorably, including 14% with a “very favorable” and 47% with a “somewhat favorable” view of the Marxist-originated ideology. Only 16% of Democrats hold an unfavorable view of socialism — only 5% hold a “very unfavorable” view.
But Americans hold differing and wide-ranging views on what exactly socialism is. Throughout works such as “The Communist Manifesto,” “Das Kapital,” “Critique of the Gotha Program,” and other writings, Marxist visionaries Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, the progenitors of communism, defined socialism as the “lower phase” of communism, when the revolutionary communist society has just emerged from capitalism. The clearest definition Marx offers is found in his 1875 “Critique of the Gotha Program”:
“What we have to deal with here is a communist society, not as it has developed on its own foundations, but, on the contrary, just as it emerges from capitalist society; which is thus in every respect, economically, morally, and intellectually, still stamped with the birthmarks of the old society from whose womb it emerges. Accordingly, the individual producer receives back from society — after the deductions have been made — exactly what he gives to it… The same amount of labor which he has given to society in one form, he receives back in another. Here obviously the same principle prevails as that which regulates the exchange of commodities… Hence, equal right here is still — in principle — a bourgeois right…”
Later Marxists, including Bolshevik revolutionary Vladimir Lenin, would explicitly refer to this initial stage of communism, immediately following revolution against the capitalist system, as “socialism.” Marx and Engels never refer to socialism as an entirely different ideology from communism but instead treat it as the early transition between capitalism and communism. The principle of communism, according to the duo, is “from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs,” while socialism at least still meters out benefits on the basis of contribution to the state.
According to a Cygnal survey published this month, only 16% of Americans understand socialism similarly to how Marx and Engels defined it: “a system where the means of production are publicly controlled for the social welfare and equal distribution.” Nearly 40% define socialism as “universal access to services,” while 37% define it as “overbearing government control.” While Cygnal found that 45% of Americans wanted the nation to back away from socialism, 38% wanted the nation to “embrace” socialist policies, including 58% of Democrats.
Similarly, in the 2025 American College Student Freedom, Progress, and Flourishing Survey, American college students were asked to agree with two different definitions of socialism: “redistribution and active government” and “central planning and the collective ownership of property.” Most students (48%) defined socialism as “redistribution and active government,” while only about a third (34%) defined socialism as “central planning and the collective ownership of property,” the definition more aligned with Marx’s and Engels’s writings. However, only 25% of students professed to hold a positive view of socialism.
S.A. McCarthy serves as a news writer at The Washington Stand, a news division of the Family Research Council.
Editor’s Note: ‘Legalized Theft’
Dr. David Reagan, in his recent article, “Legalized Theft: The Dangerous Socialist Movement Once Again Rears Its Ugly Head In America,” wrote:
Some liberal Christian spokesmen have tried to defend Socialism on the grounds that the early Church in Jerusalem practiced Socialism as described in Acts 2:44-45: “And all those who had believed were together, and had all things in common; and they began selling their property and possessions and were sharing them with all, as anyone might have need.”
Yes, the early Christians, who were severely persecuted, banded together in communal groups to help defend and support each other, but that is a far cry from Socialism. The key here is that they shared their goods of their own free will. No one forced them to do so. They were practicing benevolence, not Socialism.
In like manner, today, I give a lot of my income to many ministries, churches, and social welfare organizations that provide food, clothing, and even lodging to poor people. But I do so willingly as an expression of my love of Jesus. No one forces me to do so.
Again, the Socialists utilize the power of the State to force people to give to others through policies that result in a forced redistribution of income. And that is theft, pure and simple. Their desire is to make people dependent on the State because such dependence, in turn, will provide the Socialists with ever greater power over people’s lives.
One interesting thing in this regard that I have noticed over the years is that when Socialist politicians are forced to reveal their income tax returns, they never show any significant donations to help the poor. No, these “compassionate” liberals want to help the poor with your money and mine—not theirs.
