> the real world critics of crony capitalism also coined the term socialism and then set about forming sociopathic totalitarian stat

No, they didn't; the people who did the latter were different people, decades later than the former, who, despite claiming ideological continuity, departed radically from the theory of the former. The original critics saw capitalism as (like socialism, but prior to it) an imperfect but necessary developmental stage on the road to the end-stage of communism, while the people who built the totalitarian dystopias saw it as a thing to be avoided entirely, adapted Marxist theory to bypass it, etc.

> and by socialism i mean the 4th international, the 3rd international, etc.,

Obviously, the 3rd and 4th international were not the people who wrote the original critiques in which capitalism was named

> but which are in full agreement with what casual observers would call communism and or marxism

“Casual observers” are called that for a reason.

> source: i used to be an active communist

Not at all surprised; you seem to still deeply hold to the propaganda of one of the Leninist-derived branches, even having abandoned it as an ideology/identity.

no Leninist would every acknowledge the 4th international.

i won't argue the rest of the flaws in your response because you are clearly a bitter-ender