I am wondering why this question was closed.
The reason one of the mods Swami Vishwananda gave was "I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because the question is asking about a difference defined in the dictionary."
I was totally bewildered. Communism, in essence, according to Marx and Engels, is to me almost very close to the anarchism, quote
Marx, >When communist artisans associate with one another, theory, propaganda, etc., is their first end. But at the same time, as a result of this association, they acquire a new need — the need for society — and what appears as a means becomes an end. ... the brotherhood of man is no mere phrase with them, but a fact of life, and the nobility of man shines upon us from their work-hardened bodies. ( Human Needs & the division of Labour )
According to Marx and Engels, when communism is established, the division of the labor and the money itself would have been abolished, which to me is impossible, since the problem reification , wherein communism society, all the "communication" between all the humans are conducted through their labor itself, which is, impossible ( or at least to me. and which is no problem to Socialism )
The reification matter was debated around 50-70's, especially by Wataru Hiromatsu and Lucac, since the men can not exchange the commodities through labors themselves ( need an intervention through the Money The Mammon. )
Marx > In communist society, where nobody has one exclusive sphere of activity but each can become accomplished in any branch he wishes, society regulates the general production and thus makes it possible for me to do one thing today and another tomorrow, to hunt in the morning, fish in the afternoon, rear cattle in the evening, criticise after dinner, just as I have a mind, without ever becoming hunter, fisherman, herdsman or critic.( German Ideology )
This is the statement by Marx about the communism aka the total semi-anarchism. Who makes the tools for hunting for one's morning activities? Who makes the rear cattle in the evening? The one who rears?
On the other hand in Socialism the appropriation of the apt amount commodities to each workers are main concern, where the abolishment of the division of the labor doesn't matter at all, the perfect freedom is ignored ( either in a good sense or bad sense. ) So the distinction between Socialism and so-called Communism is a huge matter, not a dictionary level, and I am astonished that this question ( sincere ) was closed. I would like the moderators to reopen. The reason that this distinction is the dictionary level is a complete ignorance to the Marx and Engel's ideas, not Marxism.
And there is furthermore. Socialism doesn't deal with the problem of thingnification wherein the human beings are dealt as the things, but rather only see the pastoral community where each individual works happily with same wages and the same amount of labor. I was bewildered that the Philosophy mods have not yet conquered such a huge but simple distinction, and I was wondering if they are thinking Marx and Engels are not philosophers, but rather the common view, which is the radical revolutionaryies, which is a complete nonsense to me.