But that does not require socialism though.., just end of corruption, prejudice and exploitation.
Basic level of survival for me: shelter, food, health care, and of course education to enable equal or at least as equal as possible opportunity.
Nah, the best example of systems/states that enable what you want are the Scandinavian countries that follow the Nordic model in which you combine far-reaching social security programs with emphasis on private ownership and companies, so called social corporatism. But communists and socialists have hated this model because it prevents the development to communism/socialism and thus the government holding power and means of production while having worked better for life standard improvement than any socialist/communist country ever did.
But even in that system, better earning people have to contribute a lot more to programs and things that they themselves do not use much, so they have to be content with that. In Germany where I live for example (close to Nordic model but a few differences), many people are not ok with it, and can, to a certain extent at least, opt out of paying into public security programs and switch to private insurance because you pay less on a personal level at least (changes if you have kids) and get much better treatment for it, or if you do use/need health care, you get a certain percentage of your money back.
Yeah old school commies need to give up the idea hyper-centralization of Government.
It was mostly a disaster and prone to extreme corruption and bureaucratic mess.
I'm sure in the 90's when Commies regimes was collapsing one after another it really made even the most hardcore socialists to give up the classic Marxist-Lenin and other old school thoughts.
The Nordic model is probably the most realistic and with an actual tangible successful results of higher standard of living
The mostly good thing happening in former socialist states is industrialization+ high literacy. Which something can happen even under Capitalist regimes.
When I first read the New born state of India and their attempt of socialism I thought it's sounds good in paper but the implementation of the policies are disastrous and Socialist India was really held back in those decades.
it was the Capitalistic shift and Economic liberation/ privatization in 90s that brought massive Economic progress.
One could argue China Also did the same albeit still maintaining the one party monopoly
Tho the drawback is massive disparity in wealth and the rise of Oligarchs/ untouchable elites that keep becoming ultra rich ie Unequal society, back to classic socialist criticism of Capitalism
If one or two regimes failed it's Fair but if most of them failed then it's clearly not practical
Now the world is too deeply interconnected and it's economic interest of any state to adopt hyper capitalism to get economic progress.
So now we're stuck. Capitalism have been successful bringing progress for humanity
and now the world ain't got appetite for different styles of system beyond the Capitalistic Paradigm that can give us more *ideal* society