Not that I want to degrade one of my heroes (Spengler), but he is a German and Germans, including even so great a thinker as Weber, do not write about human orders with any degree of scientific constraint – they desire the recreation of the church in secular prose. You are better reading italians than germans.
That said, in the current vernacular, in operational language, socialism refers to central control of the means of production, and central distribution of proceeds of production, with disputes settled by discretionary bureaucracy. This in opposition to capitalism, with distributed control of the means of production and distributed proceeds from production, with disputes solved under common law of torts (competition).
An empirical analysis is that all peoples swing between central control and private control depending upon what is possible for them given their resources, demographics, degree of development, degree of normative development, and available institutions.
As far as I know, the debate is over, and the findings of the 20th century are that small homogenous highly capitalist, but highly redistributive states produce the quality of life most demonstrably preferred by peoples. And that going forward we will produce states along some spectrum of centralized (low trust) to distributed (high trust), with mixed economies. and that it is most likely in my opinion that progress if tehre is any, will be toward layered economies with socialism at the bottom and capitalism in the middle, and aristocracy at the top. which is, as far as I know, a restoration of the historical pattern of cooperation.
The experiment with monopoly economies has failed.