I don't like getting wrapped up in lexicography, but any meaningful definition of socialism has to include government ownership of the means of production. What

I don't like getting wrapped up in lexicography, but any meaningful definition of socialism has to include government ownership of the means of production. What the super-rich want is government protection for them, but they don't want to government taking over their property. So it confuses the issue to call it "socialism". It's certainly the case that the rich want protections that they deny everybody else, in ways that run counter to the dictates of capitalism. But it's not "socialism". It's just really bad capitalism.