You’re trotting out the same worn-out caricature of Marxism, acting like we’re talking about some cartoonish “totalitarian” regime bent on micromanaging every aspect of people’s lives. That’s not what socialism or Marxism has ever stood for. Marx distinguished between personal property (your home, car, toothbrush, things for personal use) and private property (the giant corporate holdings and factories used to exploit workers for profit). In other words, nobody’s coming for your toothbrush; the point is to democratize the big stuff that generates wealth so that it’s shared equitably, rather than hoarded by a few plutocrats who rely on government bailouts the moment the market hiccups.
If capitalist empires like the US, weren't constantly threatening socialist countries with war and economic sanctions, perhaps they could be more democratic and less focused on defense. The US, Britain and France, with 11 other countries invaded Soviet Russia in 1918, right after WW1. They fought alongside the White Tsarist Army, against the Red Army, and lost. The only time of peace that the USSR had was for a brief period in the 1930s. It was then invaded by 4 million Germans. It suffered 28 million deaths, and much of its infrastructure was decimated by the war. The capitalist USA didn't have to deal with that level of devastation in WW2. It literally came out of the war unscathed.
You're ignoring a lot pf facts in your critique of socialism.
