I would say that socialism and communism differ, principally, in who owns the means of production. Marx wrote the COMMUNIST manifesto and thinks that the proles should own production. Socialism seems to specialize in taxing capitalists to redistribute wealth and create huge gov't bureaucracies for their nanny state social programs.

There is a creature called Socialism. Communism was the first of its Socialistic kind and it was alive and well by the time of the French Revolution, though they did not realize what it was called. Fascism was created as the third way. Capitalism existed Communism developed, and Mussolini who was a big man in the Internationals, as his father was before him created Fascism. Mussolini realized he was proud to be an Italian and developed what he called the third way. Along comes Hitler and added a racial component to Fascism and created Nazism.
Communism is also called International Socialism. Hitler's National Socialism, aka the Nazi party. Now you have the two extremes of Socialism, both of which took their philosophy from the teachings of Karl Marx. Marx was not an original thinker, he merely collated what was already present in society. Fascism/Nazism is to the Right of Communism, both are in the Socialist category and to the Left of the political spectrum.
The International focus vs. National focus is the main difference between the two philosophies. A secondary difference is that the Communists will send in party leaders to run the major industries, whereas the Nazis will pass so many laws that the owners/managers have no discretionary authority.

Let's toss aside the philosophical aspects of these 2 totalitarian systems. If you irritate Stalin, if you survived the interrogation by the KGB, it was off to the gulags. If you irritate Hitler, if you survive the interrogation by the Gestapo, it was off to the camps. Both were systems in which the government had all the rights and the people had none. In both systems, the leaders were supported by the military and secret police. What is the difference?
I have spoken in some general terms for the sake of brevity and it is not necessary to point them out. There are a couple of so-called differences, but they are propaganda from the Communists to distance themselves from the Nazis. I consider Communism and Nazism to be Bastard Siblings joined at the hip and both belong in Hell. If you have a question or concern, I can get really detailed.

It seems that the hope of those who advocate socialist policies is that it would operate very differently from communism in the sense that the people would maintain their freedom and be taken care of.
The challenge is that for a government to be strong enough to be effectively socialist, it has the power to become communist without any appreciable resistance. The freedom is already surrendered and we just hope that the government continues to be kind.
This loss of freedom is why capitalists tend to equate the two. The joy of capitalism isn't that it has no faults or problems, it's that we remain free to solve our own problems.
Because no-one who depends on another is truly free. Such an individual will ALWAYS be at the mercy of those they depend on.

So, while there is no clear-cut between socialism and communism, we understand, in theory, that:
when most property and economic resources are owned and controlled by the state and not by individual citizens, that's communism; and
when all citizens share equally in all economic resources as allocated by a democratically-elected government, that's socialism. Something like that.
I can see how the latter definition (socialism) may appeal to many, especially working-classes. I think it is important to remember that these theories developed in protesting and protecting against the exploitation of working-classes during the Industrial Revolution, when they lived in extreme poverty which is beyond our imagination. I also think it's difficult to identify countries as being pure communist or socialist. I read somewhere that Cuba, China and North Korea are considered communist, but there are capitalist elements to the economic system of China for example. And some states identify themselves as socialist but are run by communist parties... It's too confusing for my tiny brain to handle!
In any event, we equally loathe socialism and communism because we can't get out of our heads for a second the terrible consequences that were brought by implementing these theories in the last century, hence using them interchangeably and like synonyms.
But then, there are advanced countries which are identified as socialist (or may be "socialistic" more correctly?) such as Scandinavian countries. They don't follow pure socialist ideas, but they have democratically-elected governments which are large and are supported by taxpayers who pay rather a lot of tax, thereby enabling providing health care, education, pensions, etc. which are free for every citizen. And although the governments are big, they don't interfere with people's individual rights and freedoms, and they also have highly successful capitalist sectors that promote free trade. So, if this kind of model still falls within the scope of socialism, it may be a little problematic to use socialism and communism interchangeably...? Perhaps, the definition of socialism itself is problematic as it is very broad. In that case, it may be better to use "totalitarianism" as a synonym of a system where a government dictates everything and people have very little or no freedom.

So, considering the above points, do you think there may be an element of propaganda coming from conservatives, by using socialism and communism like synonyms, as a means of scaremongering even, in an effort of suppressing socialist opponents like Jeremy Corbyn in the UK and Bernard Sanders in the US and their followers?

"Communism is just Socialism with extra steps".
"Communism is just Socialism with less freedom".
"Socialism is just Communism with good PR".

Use what sticks to your wall better.
(yes I used a Rick & Morty référence)

"There is no difference between communism and socialism, except in the means of achieving the same ultimate end: communism proposes to enslave men by force, socialism - by vote. It is merely the difference between murder and suicide." - Ayn Rand

#aynrand, #atlasshrugged

Nope, because they share the same underlying corrupt anti-laws of nature and natures God concepts. Communism, fascism, socialism are different peas in the same degenerate pod.

Sprinkle a little authoritarianism and Totalitarianism in Socialism and you get Communism

Communism is a form of socialism. It is revolutionary in nature and that is how it achieves the socialist state. It is socialism in a hurry, as I have heard it described. There are other evolutionary forms of socialism but he end goal is the same. You will notice that every communist nation was realized through revolution. The USSR, China, Cuba, Viet Nam, North Korea the Russian soviet satellites. They were all, or are still called communist nations. Venezuela is called socialist as the socialist party was voted in. Even though marxist communism is an internationalist, not a nationalist, movement.

The Communist manifesto and the manifesto of the NSDAP (National Socialist German Worker's Party) are quite similar themselves and have some similarities to the New Green Deal, like free education, free healthcare, full employment. It is impossible for them to deliver those things though. There has to be a production of wealth to pay for them. This is why creeping socialism works for awhile, as long as there is a productive class that can be robbed to pay for it.

Ummm ...
No matter how you “slice” or “define” it,...
Socialism is Communism Light.

In fact it has been quite clearly written several times by proponents of “Socialism” that Socialism is the first major step to Communism.

I would point out that BOTH are Actually Direct Paths to TOTALITARIANISM.

Have you ever read the Communist Manifesto? Most people, in western societies especially, have no understanding of the differences between socialism and communism. Here is a VERY simplistic explanation in the difference between the two. Socialism allows you the delusion you actually have a say. Communism just removes the delusion. Lol So while yes, they are technically two different political systems and not interchangeable, if allowed to run it's course, a socialistic country will. inevitably become a communist country. Most socialists don't like admitting that tho. Lol So, in the political climate we are in now, you are better off making a clear distinction between the two so I wouldn't use them interchangeably.

They can be, and are, technically distinct. However, their basic motivational origins, and ultimate effect are the same. In my mind it is a distinction without a difference.

They used to be pretty interchangeable in my country (former Czechoslovakia). Socialism was for Marx a stepping stone to communism. As socialism on its own inevitably leads to an economic and social collapse, I think that equating it with communism is not too much of a mistake.

Socialism is the pretty word the Left uses to change societies by killing their social values, their strenght, their moral, then their lives. Socialisn is the nice theory on how societies should work. Communism is the Socialism experiment, its Socialism already in its full practice.