The Scandinavian countries are not socialist.
The entire EU is socialist.
I have a friend in Norway and he says is basically communist.
That is correct. They are high-taxation welfare states.
The term "socialism" has come to possess a number of conflicting definitions, but historically it's pretty simple: in socialism the means of production may not be owned by an individual. They are owned either by a collective of their workers (soviets) or by "the people" who are supposedly personified by the State. That's it. Communism goes one step further and expands this to all property, whether it's a means of production or not.
It's odd - we're discussing Orwell on a couple of other threads at the moment - Orwell came to the realization as did Marx, that socialism may not be imposed by other than a revolutionary activity. The Fabian socialists who hoped it would be voted into power were wrong; in fact, Marx warned about that, too, in that the proletariat would be tempted to become bourgeoisie and so lose their impetus to revolution, which is pretty much what really happened. So, no revolution, no expropriation of the means of production.
This is precisely why such tragic circuses as Venezuela invariably pose as revolutionary governments. The means of production are never in practice peacefully surrendered, they must be seized, in part as an expression of the triumph of the people over the individual possessor; in practice as an expression of the triumph of the State over the people. Socialism is sanctioned theft of the means of production; communism is sanctioned theft of all property. It is also very indiscreet to say so in the presence of one's loving comrades who would happily shoot one for it.