Did he guaranteed a Republican President for the nxt term

Well, you are telling me that my country was not socialist. I gave you a hint of my country, the Eastern Block, most countries had the same policies, being "led" by the USSR. Let's say it was USSR.

So first: tell me why do you think USSR was not socialist. (they did call themselves "socialist" and they did had the socialist policies (in case you don't know, the most important one- by the definition of socialism: "workers (community) own the means of production").

Reminder: "socialsm: a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole."

You are 100% wrong in your assertions. Read Marx on what he is saying about socialism.

Look at all socialist states: ALL have ditched true democratic elections because people don't want socialism, whatever you think. They might vote for it due to being ignorant of what socialism is, like you, but then they will vote out.

"True socialism comes with a government chosen by a free election (power to the people)... so even though you won't acknowledge it... free elections is a core part of true socialism..." - this is NOT true.

What Marx says:

“Every provisional political set-up following a revolution requires a dictatorship, and an energetic dictatorship at that.” - and he sees the coming of socialism only being possible through a revolution.

“The class struggle necessarily leads to the dictatorship of the proletariat.”.


"You are probably right that if you take the hardcore definition of communism (as described by Marx) then no countries have ever lived up to that (Maybe North Korea came close at some point)... " finally you start to realize some things.

"but then again what you define as socialism isn't real socialism... you said you grew up in the eastern block... and lived under a socialist regime... sorry to tell you but you didn't... you lived in a country (even though you won't tell me which country) which mixed ideas from both communism and socialism to create the structure of your sociaty..."
Nope, no communism there. And it's funny that only what YOU define as socialist is socialist, but without defining your definition of socialism ...

I asked you to list the differences between socialism and communism and pick a "communist" state of your choice and we can see if ANY of the communist ideas had been implemented in that state.

But you deflect and don't want to specifically pick one because you know that your arguments don't hold when faced with reality.

If you take these:

"From each according to his ability, to each according to his contribution.

Individuals own personal property but all industrial and production capacity is communally owned and managed by a democratically elected government.

Production is intended to meet individual and societal needs and distributed according to individual ability and contribution.

Classes exist but differences are diminished. It is possible for some people to earn more than others.

Freedom of religion is allowed."

You will see that all socialist states (that you call "communist") have implemented exactly those ideas. USSR, PRC, NK, Cuba, etc.

They even faked the "democratically elected government". In case you didn't know all these states had elections, "democratic" elections.

But, first of all, how can it be "democratic" when you are forced to elect between ... socialism and socialism?? That is no democracy when you vote only for the face but not for ideas. Even the simple fact that it's a single party "democracy" makes it undemocratic ...

And second, as Stalin said (according to his secretary memoirs): It doesn't matter who votes but who counts the votes". That is "democratic socialism" lol. And yes, most of those countries even had "democratic" in their names, like "Democratic People's Republic of Korea" and it's even in their constitution:

"All the State organs in the DPRK are formed and function on the principle of
democratic centralism"
"The State shall adhere to the class line, strengthen the dictatorship of people’s
democracy and firmly defend the people’s power and socialist system against all
subversive acts of hostile elements at home and abroad."
"The DPRK shall champion the democratic, national rights of Koreans overseas and
their rights recognized by the international law."
"The State shall firmly adhere to the principle of properly combining political
guidance with economic and technical guidance, the unified guidance of the State
with the creativity of each unit, monolithic leadership with democracy, political and
moral incentives with material incentives in the guidance and management of the
socialist economy."

Democracy my ass, although it's full of "democratic".

It's simple:
if you have democracy and freedom you cannot have socialism. Period.
If you have socialism you cannot have democracy and freedom. Period. Even if you just take into consideration that you don't really have a choice (no democracy) and that you are not allowed to have a personal business (no freedom).

And another thing: the only situations in which organizations that use a socialist structure are somehow successful is capitalism and democracy: in which people are allowed to form a "socialist organization" like mondragon - based on voluntary agreements.