Total commies ... check out their patches and berets: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EgCAce59bbU
Even if you require the link to communism, 'comrade' in the popular sense _is_ used by _socialists_ to describe one another, not just for communists, communists are just a subset ideology of socialism. Similar to anarchists, progressives, and more on the umbrella of "the left", communists are just another branch on the tree of ideologies, and as a branch, they used their mother's language of comradery to describe their fellow party-members and allies.
You can always admit when you are prejudiced by assumptions, you know, so I hope you take an interest in reading this article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comrade
Edit:
> The distinctions between socialism and communism are rather academic and irrelevant in the long run
That's quite literally the biggest difference between socialism and communism, the long run. Communists want a communist society as the end-goal of socialism; Socialists do not have that hope, in fact most are not focused on the end goal as we can't ever ascertain what that would look like - so they focus on the values of socialist ideas right now, what we can do now to ensure equality, freedom, and personal rights by protecting all living beings in health and sickness, success and failure. A society of equals first.
>That's quite literally the biggest difference between socialism and communism, the long run.
Without getting into a huge discussion on this, books have been written to try to draw a line between these two things. Ultimately they refer to the same thing, a deviation from a free market and society. To support people who have less, they must steal from those who have more. Socialism or socialist policies (such as the type we have in the United States, not the kind that most original socialists were writing about) is like a concerning lump that might turn out to be nothing more than a nuisance. Communism is Stage 4 cancer.
>A society of equals first.
This is easiest to achieve when people have a certain amount in common. But even among the most homogeneous society, differences are ever present and naturally result in different outcomes. The only sense in which we can fairly approach equality is in being equally protected by the law. If you insist on siphoning off the financial resources of those who provide valuable services to benefit others merely for existing, the worse off everyone is going to be. Many books have been written to prove that this is the case. Helping people who have experienced some kind of unforeseen setback is fine, up to a point, but I think that ought to be voluntary too.
https://theintercept.com/2023/03/21/fbi-colorado-springs-sur...
https://jacobin.com/2018/08/fbi-infiltration-new-left-aoki-s...
https://www.npr.org/2021/07/01/1012107432/how-a-former-spy-t...
https://indypendent.org/2019/02/lessons-from-the-fbis-secret...
https://theintercept.com/2023/02/10/deconstructed-fbi-inform...
That's because he's a democratic socialist, not a communist like they want people to think. If people really looked into the policies of the DSA they would support it. There is a reason Einstein, Keller, and more were adamant supporters.