That's a bad problem: people like you make up their own definitions of the words, then make glib assertions based on the assumption that everybody else means the same thing, and as a result people talk right past each other.
Not just you. A lot of people--mostly Gen-X and younger-- these days think the word 'socialism' means "the government doing things that benefit the people instead of corporations". That's not what it means.
I'd say that "socializing" is pretty clearly meant to say that a centrally planned authority is doing some robbery, taking the ill gotten gains, and using those gains to bribe voters with inducements and largely debt-based goodies to get the incumbents reelected.
Yes, that's another bad problem: people like you making their own definitions of words so that their opinions are correct by definition.
I would say that "doing some robbery, taking the ill gotten gains, and using those gains to bribe voters with inducements and largely debt-based goodies to get the incumbents reelected" is the definition of crony capitalism.
Maybe that's polluting your precious fantasy of a worker utopia,
I have no fantasy of a worker utopia. I think that socialism had fatal flaws and doesn't work. But if we fail to use words that are understood with the same meaning, we can't even discuss the flaws. (Unrestricted capitalism also has flaws, which turn out to be well known to any actual economists (and is why real economic systems have restrictions). Believing that there are two and only two choices, and no other possible choices, is another bad problem.)
