> I actually see more socialists trying to claim that the capitalist economies of the Western Civilization socialist than anyone else.
That's because socialists (who, after all, are the heirs to the tradition that invented the term "capitalism" to refer to the then-dominant system in the developed world of the late 19th Century that they were criticizing) are more likely to recognize that the so-called "capitalist" societies of Western Europe (and even, though less so, the United States) are quite far from the system that "capitalism" was coined to refer to, specifically as a result of reforms to the system designed to address the same problems with it that were identified by 19th Century socialists (and, often, reforms specifically championed by socialists, though often watered down somewhat.)
The now-dominant system in the developed world -- the modern mixed economy -- has a lot in common with capitalism, but it also has a lot of elements of socialism. Its at least as wrong to call it the former as it is to call it the latter (especially since socialism has been, stretching back to its origins, often seen as an evolutionary step building on the experience of capitalism, not a diametrically opposed system, even if the proponents of the two systems would end up politically opposed.)
That's because socialists (who, after all, are the heirs to the tradition that invented the term "capitalism" to refer to the then-dominant system in the developed world of the late 19th Century that they were criticizing) are more likely to recognize that the so-called "capitalist" societies of Western Europe (and even, though less so, the United States) are quite far from the system that "capitalism" was coined to refer to, specifically as a result of reforms to the system designed to address the same problems with it that were identified by 19th Century socialists (and, often, reforms specifically championed by socialists, though often watered down somewhat.)
The now-dominant system in the developed world -- the modern mixed economy -- has a lot in common with capitalism, but it also has a lot of elements of socialism. Its at least as wrong to call it the former as it is to call it the latter (especially since socialism has been, stretching back to its origins, often seen as an evolutionary step building on the experience of capitalism, not a diametrically opposed system, even if the proponents of the two systems would end up politically opposed.)