It's absolutely true that socialism is an overloaded term that can refer to anything from the European-style welfare state (hardly a hellhole) to far less pleasant dictatorships like Cuba to out-and-out mass murder like in Cambodia, China, and the USSR.
However, the post said "I believe my generation will overthrow the arbitrary and brutal authority of corporate capitalism and bigoted conservatism in favor of rationalistic, libertarian socialism driven by a scientific approach and a concern for universal social justice".
That sounds more like Pol Pot and Lenin than your standard EU bureaucrat. The latter usually pays at least lip service to capitalism and markets even if they often have a conflicted relationship with them.
Also, the thing is that we tend to take people at face value in most other areas. If someone calls for takeover by Hamas or Islamic Jihad or the KKK or the American Nazi Party or what have you, we usually do not go into detail to try to figure out exactly what splinter faction they belong to, or whether they represent "true Islamism" or "true Nazism", because we know that ideologies coming from that direction are a dead end and have killed millions of people.
Similarly, if someone calls for the overthrow of capitalism, it's incumbent upon them to explain that they don't really mean "overthrow" for real, but something more like Sweden [complete with multinational corporations like Ikea].
Postscript: For what it's worth, 90% of Indians and 93% of Chinese believe that trade and business ties are good for the country. These are still large, poor countries -- yet they are actually considerably more favorably inclined towards capitalism than wealthy countries like the US (now at only 66% favorable!)
Probably has something to do with the huge trade deficit of the US, if the US was a large net exporter that created many jobs, people's opinions should be different.
Certainly not as many as Communism or Nazism, but in the various manifestations of political Islam (aka Islamism), I think it's fair to say its adherents have killed millions.
In toting up that grim number I'd include the following, in which political Islam of one stripe or another was certainly a motivating force:
1. The Bangladesh Massacre, targeted disproportionately at Hindus. More than 3 million dead.
2. The Iran/Iraq War. Iraq started it but Saddam's avowed intention, to the extent it can be trusted, was to stop Khomeini from fomenting Islamic revolution in Iraq. Massive atrocities on both sides, 1.3 million dead.
3. The Algerian Civil War. 150-200 thousand dead.
4. The Janjaweed perpetrators of the Sudanese Genocide. At least 330 thousand dead.
The killers/combatants here were influenced by numerous factors, but even if you assign only fractional "credit", I think it is indeed accurate to ascribe millions of deaths to political Islam. Moreover (and this is I think the point you were driving at), I think it's fair to say that Al-Qaeda has genocidal intent even if not capabilities.
