Das Capital-ization: Should You Be Writing about Communism or communism?

When writing about the political system established in the Soviet Union, which was adopted by and imposed on countries throughout Central and Eastern Europe, Asia, and beyond after World War II, should we capitalize the term or not? That is, should we write about Communism or communism?

As someone who has studied the history of the Eastern Bloc and frequently works with scholars and historians writing about Communism, this question is particularly relevant to my editing and translating practice. Such capitalization choices need to be made regularly in the manuscripts I edit and translate, and therefore consistent application is an important editorial consideration.

The answer to the question posed above is deceptively simple. However, it is such a complicated matter that archivist Peter Filardo wrote a twenty-three-page academic paper dedicated to this very subject: "What is the C/case? C/communism/s, Communist/s, Anti-C/communism/ist/s, and the 'C/capitalization Question.'" In this blog post, we'll look at how to deal with this issue in academic writing. But don't worry: I'll be much briefer than Filardo.

A Simple Answer

The Chicago Manual of Style (CMOS) provides us with a short and relatively simple solution for dealing with the capitalization of this term in Section 8.67:

For consistency, however—as in a work about communism in which the philosophy and its adherents, the political party, and party members and adherents are discussed—capitalizing the philosophy, together with the organization and its adherents, in both noun and adjective forms, will prevent editorial headaches.

The basic idea is to capitalize Communism everywhere it appears, simply because this term can justifiably be written with both a capital letter and a lowercase one depending on its exact meaning. Therefore, to avoid unnecessary mental anguish and ensure consistency throughout a manuscript, CMOS suggests a pragmatic solution.

Two Broad Definitions of Communism

That Communism can both be capitalized and uncapitalized reveals that this term has different meanings, one that calls for a lowercase "c" and the other an uppercase "C."

1) communism

In the traditional Marxist worldview, communism was considered the ultimate stage in society's development. Capitalism would give way to socialism, which would eventually evolve into communism, where the state would "wither away" and society would rule itself. Used in this sense, the term communism should be written with a lowercase "c."

2) Communism

When the term Communism or its derivatives are part of a proper noun, there is no question they should be capitalized: Communist Party of the Soviet Union, Communist Party of Czechoslovakia, Communist International (Comintern).

But a gray area exists between these two clear-cut usage cases. What if we are describing the society that existed under, say, the Bulgarian Communist Party from 1946 to 1990? Should it be communist society or Communist society? And what about countries, such as East Germany, that were ruled by parties that did not contain the term Communist in their titles? Certainly, the Socialist Unity Party of Germany was a C/communist party, right?

Historian of Communism Archie Brown argues that a capital "C" should be used to refer to real Communist systems "with their enormous and oppressive state power."[1] This approach clearly distinguishes communism as an idea from Communism as a reality. Brown convincingly outlines the defining features of a Communist system and why such systems should indeed be called Communist and not socialist, the term Communists used to refer to their political system. But that's an issue I'll explore in another blog post.

Things sure are getting confusing, aren't they? So, what is a writer to do?

My Recommendations

When it comes to capitalizing C/communism, there are two options: capitalize consistently or capitalize based on meaning. So, what approach would I, an editor, recommend?

1) First things first. If you are submitting an article to a journal, check that publication's instructions for authors or style sheet.

I have looked through the instructions for authors from a non-representative sample of history and political science journals. Here is what I found.

Many, but not all, such journals provide clear guidance on this issue. Some just refer authors to CMOS.

Those that do address the capitalization of this term advocate several approaches, some of which are vague and leave capitalization decisions up to the author.

Interestingly, journals that do address capitalization tend to favor the lowercase communism.

For example, the instructions for authors provided by Contemporary European History note the following:

3. Capitalisation should be kept to a minimum

a. Capitalise formally recognised political parties, but do not capitalise ideologies:

Fascist/Socialist/Communist Party BUT fascist/socialist/communist thought

Here we must interpret for ourselves how to deal with terms such as C/communist leaders, C/communist rule, C/communism (as in a period of C/communist rule), or C/communist art.

With an even more explicit preference for the lowercase spelling, Kritika: Explorations in Russian and Eurasian History recommends the following capitalization rules:

the Communist Party (but communist parties); the party; communist(s); communist countries; communism

Communist and Post-Communist Studies does not specify how to capitalize C/communism, but the rules can be inferred from this statement included in the journal's author guidelines:

The journal publishes theoretically-informed case studies, cross-national analyses, and cross-regional comparison involving communist and post-communist states and societies, as well as historical or theoretical analyses bearing comparative significance.

In contrast, The Journal of Cold War Studies style guide prescribes the following uppercase spellings:

Communism, Communization

Communist era

2) If you have no style guide to follow and you are sufficiently knowledgeable about           C/communism, I suggest following Brown's model of writing lowercase communism to refer to the philosophy or ideological notion of a classless society and using uppercase Communism to refer to real political systems. If space allows, you may include a note about your style choice regarding capitalization. Again, you might take inspiration from Brown, who writes in a global history of Communism that "Throughout the book––to reiterate an important distinction––I use 'communism' when referring to that fanciful future utopia (and 'communism' also for other non-Marxist utopias), but 'Communism', with a capital 'C', when discussing actual Communist systems."[2] By doing so, you will clarify to your readers why this term is capitalized differently throughout your text.

3) If you have no style guide to follow and you aren't an expert on Communism (capitalized here using Brown's model), follow the advice provided in CMOS: capitalize this term consistently.

Summing It All Up

There are no hard and fast rules for capitalizing C/communism. Whether and when you write this term with a lowercase "c" or an uppercase "C" is purely a style choice, not a mechanical issue. But choices call for rationales.

In this post, we examined two main approaches to writing the term C/communism. Brown advocates carefully distinguishing capitalization based on meaning, whereas CMOS is more flexible, suggesting the pragmatic solution of always capitalizing Communism. And then there are journal-specific style guides, which tend to prefer the lowercase communism.

The most important thing is to choose a capitalization strategy and stick to it. By being consistent, and even explaining your style choice to readers, you will convey to them that you are a careful writer, not a sloppy one.

If you still aren't sure whether to write about Communism or communism, get in touch with me. I'd be glad to help you out!

[1] Archie Brown, The Rise and Fall of Communism (Vintage Books, 2010), 101.

[2] Brown, The Rise and Fall, 11.