In the coworking space I work at, the Democratic socialist cohort, a group of Maoists, and a group of Marxist Leninists (yeah I get it, not Socialists but close enough that they all feel comfortable debating each other) sit around and get into knock down drag out battles about the correct ways to socialize the means of productions. I think it's gotten to the point where they dislike eachother more than any outside group. They agree on literally nothing because all three of their world views are razor focused on ultra nuanced minutiae of how they will run Socialism/communism once their team wins and they make all the rules.
They have zero interface with reality or our current system so all of the stuff about how you build a stable system where any of this stuff is even relevant in the first place is totally uninteresting to them. Unless it involves them getting to dress in black and protest in a way they can post on social media. Then maybe it's worth a discussion.
It's basically Dungeons and Dragons for people with complexes about ruling the world.
But to bring it back around, nothing seems to be more socialist than telling other Socialists they don't know how to do socialism correctly besides maybe complaining about how non socialists have zero knowledge of Socialism.
Unsurprisingly, every single example he picks to illustrate his point is something that has been deeply divisive among American socialists, rather than characterizing a consensus among them. (And this isn't just a anarchist vs. authoritarian (“libertarian socialists vs. democratic socialists vs. Marxists vs. Leninists/Maoists” spectrum) thing, or revolutionary socialist vs. electoralists (everyone else vs. demsocs) thing, either, as division on the issues Smith purports are emblematic of “American socialism” are deep and cross all of the traditional subgroups.