You're missing my point entirely.My consistent point is that those individual philosophies share certain commonalities which fall into either the socialist or libertarian camp or else are some mixture of the two.
Well as I noted socialism is not opposed to individual rights per se. It just views them as less important than the general welfare of society.
Actually I did in my very first paragraph where I said: What is odd about that is that the term libertarian was first used by some socialists in self reference to themselves and this use persists today outside of the United States.
But you do make a good point nevertheless. It does seem inconsistent that I am using the original definition of socialism and a more modern and USA-centric definition of libertarianism. But there is a method to my madness. Libertarian is a better term to use when describing the philosophy that used to be called liberalism because the term liberal has come to connote something different from classical liberalism. But what term could we use to better describe what I mean by socialism? I can't think of any. Besides the examples of socialist systems we have seen in real life pretty much uniformly exhibit the characteristics of my definition. The ones that don't, such as European social democracies, are not viewed as purely socialist but rather mixed economies.
I suggest that those socialists who employed the term libertarian in self reference really were libertarians by my definition. As are some today. They may have advocated collective ownership of land and the means of production but they just figured that would become the natural order of things once the state was abolished. They would argue, against other socialists, that the general welfare of society does not improve by curtailing individual liberty but rather that it improves by maximizing individual freedom.
I understand what you're doing, and you're free to describe your understanding however you wish. But, in doing so, you are presenting a narrowed and specific view of both ideologies that completely ignores the overarching ideals.