19 responses

  1. Marjorie
    October 17, 2010

    NICE, simple, and straight to the point. This was extremely helpful.


    • Malebo
      October 24, 2016

      Very helpful I tell you.


  2. Kim
    May 13, 2011

    This does not take into account key areas of either theories, and would not pass a Wikipedia article tests for accuracy and/or unbiasedness. These great minds’ theories deserve better treatment than that, in my opinion.


  3. chris
    March 8, 2012

    this is about 90% inaccurate. a simple reading of both works would lead one to see that adam smith anticipated marx eighty years later. smith was incredibly critical of the division of labor, for example, and is just as blunt about it later in wealth of nations as marx was. or one could simply google “the vile maxim of the masters.”


    • Nikki
      March 21, 2013

      Smith critical of the division of labor? No, Smith wrote ‘The Wealth of Nations’ highlighting labor as the central economic determinant. Smith wholly believed that the division of labor created an advanced manufacturing economy.


    • Towelie
      January 22, 2019

      Get rekt kid


  4. Manuel
    August 28, 2012

    I’ve read a lot of “differences between” in this page, and most of the time it is very helpful. But I found myself in some kind of moral compulsion to say that this particular article is mostly wrong.

    I agree with other comments that this article has untenable descriptions or explanations of both theories. Both were lucid and critical economists, both with highly developed libertarian ethics, none wich such myths about the wellfare of societies or the happiness of humans. Please erase or change this “difference between”, it’s most harmful for anyone who wants to learn

    I read your note below about general information, “as is”, and “with all faults” articles; but this is wrong even as general information. Smith’s and Marx’s theories are not even “as” this, and I hope you want to not give-for kindness, of course- this almost entirely fault.

    I repeat, this is generally a great site for me; that’s why I’m giving my point for making it better. Thank you!


  5. Alejandro le gusta caca
    February 8, 2013



    • sherwood hardcock
      March 11, 2013

      it has seem to me i find this comment quite rude and to be in fact that yes nobody cares but youre a fagg


      March 22, 2013

      If nobody cares then why did you look it up fag?


  6. stuckmode
    April 16, 2013

    “He thought that the proletariat would be looking to maximize their own profits, and, in turn, keep the wages of the working class as low as possible, thus trapping the working class members in a vicious cycle of abject poverty or destitution that they can never escape from.”

    Wouldn’t the bourgies be trying to maximize their own profits, instead of the proletariat?


  7. Za682
    August 29, 2013

    Karl Marx-Communist
    Believed Government should have control over businessess and that no one makes more or does better than the other.

    Adam Smith-Socialist
    Believed that people should have the right to a free-market economy and do whatever they please.

    And the concepts that are given are clearly defined by the teminology if you read this artical properly (See capitolism and other terms).


    • Clayton
      March 6, 2014

      Your definitions are off by a long shot,

      Communism: A classless, stateless, moneyless social order where all private property (productive property) is owned by the people.

      Socialism: A social and economic system where the means of production are democratically owned and managed by the people. In Marxist theory, this stage occurs after capitalism.

      Capitalism: An economic system where trade, industry, and the means of production are owned privately.

      Both Socialism and Communism are opposed to both government and private ownership, and instead promote democratic ideals. The “Communism” you described, which was practiced in the Soviet Union and Maoist China, is best aligned with State Capitalism.


  8. Greg
    October 27, 2013

    I think that the author has simplified the Marx’s theory. Marx explained how the capital system works based on surplus value theory, which further explains why the economic crisis keep occurring in cycles. He disagreed with Smith for the “Invisible Hand”. Otherwise the capitalism will always be in equilibrium and the economic crisis like the one in 2008 in US will never happen.


  9. Garrett
    November 5, 2014

    This was helpful for a History report. Thanks


  10. Pops
    November 6, 2014

    @GAYBOYSWAG you’re a fagg


  11. Timbo Dee
    October 12, 2016

    This was a poorly conceived, poorly researched article with awful grammar throughout to boot. This would barely pass muster in a remedial 5th grade English class, and even then, the teacher would be obligated to correct the conclusions reached.

    Also, the children who A. engage in name calling and/or B. made their user name ALL IN CAPS have about as much to offer intellectually as a rock with noticeably impaired mental acuity when compared to normal rocks. If you folks haven’t considered suicide before, now might be a great time to start. Save our country’s few special ed dollars for the kids that actually give a fuck about learning.


    • no
      January 26, 2017

      dat irony doh


  12. هک کلش
    May 28, 2019

    Great post.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Back to top
mobile desktop