im not talking about cambodia, buddy. i'm talking about the US. there are vast differences between the policies and structure of the US and the leading world economies and the failed dictatorships which your source states the obvious about. these top-tier economies have achieved more robust, longer-lasting social policy than most of those which your source puts forward. these are the facts which you ignore.
Then this explains why you have no concept as to what socialism leads to. You think America is something special that it will never be like any socialist country that has came before it?
"When asking how does socialism work, make sure you realize that it works in a way that tends to destroy the precious freedoms and rights Americans currently enjoy"
the US is not a pseudo-socialist dictatorship. dictatorship and oligarchy tends to destroy freedoms and rights, whether it is socialist or not. did your grammar school source explore that?
the US is a capitalist economy and a constitutional, democratic republic. nevertheless, which government has built more hospitals, and put more pensions behind retirees, pol pot's cambodia or the united states?
setting aside your stupid ideology and broken-record anecdotes from some of the lamest sources i've seen in a while, what does the above comparative analysis say about those who characterize social policy in the US with that of the worst regimes in recent history? can it be said these regimes were socialist at all?
What is your comprehension level? Do you have an understanding THE MEANING OF WHAT I AM POSTING?
"When asking how does socialism work, make sure you realize that it works in a way that tends to destroy the precious freedoms and rights Americans currently enjoy"
It's saying that any country that goes down the road of socialism the people of that country almost assuredly lose the individual rights.