If you think they weren't socialists you're wrong. If you think socialism benefits mankind, you've have been lied to.

Socialism is wonderful idea that you can get something for nothing and that is how it has always been sold to the weak minded.

Socialism is a form of collectivism. Collectivism is group identity. Socialism uses central planners to determine what the collective needs. It is a one size fits all solution.

It is the idea of everyone pulling together to make a better world. The problem is how it is always been, always is and always will be implemented.

In order to make this better world the individual must be stripped of all his or her rights. That way the central planners can work unhampered by any laws or constitutions that protect individual rights.

This includes 4 inalienable rights that are mentioned in our Declaration of Independence and in the 14th amendment to the Constitution. Those are the right to life, liberty, property and the pursuit of happiness.

Under socialism all 4 of those inalienable rights are taken from you. You no longer have the right to life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness and property. Why is that a problem? Because those 4 rights form the foundation upon which freedom is built. Without those 4 fundamental rights there is no freedom.

Without freedom NONE of those wonderful promises that socialism makes can be a reality.

Considering how the worst kind of people are always attracted to power and control and that socialism is the ultimate power and control grab over the lives of the people, then take a wild guess at who A) is pushing socialism and B) who will be the central planners or ruling elites or the oligarchy?

This is why socialists always try to tell you that real socialism has never been tried. Um... yes it has. This is exactly what socialism is. Even with the best of intentions when you take complete power and control away from the individual and give it to the collective (who are governed by the oligarchy) then this is what happens.

Basically put, if you want another Adolf Hitler, then socialism is how you get another Adolf Hitler.

People hold Hitler up as the worst human but Mao Tse Tung murdered far more people than Hitler. Joseph Stalin murdered more people than Hitler.

All in all socialism is directly responsible for the genocide of between 100 and 150 million people. I have been told by some socialists that those numbers are inflated. Oh really? Does some number under 100 million people still justify socialism?

BTW communism (or Marxism) is the goal of all socialists. Communism is socialism only with more force. Otherwise they are the same thing.

And millions of dead in its wake

The opposite actually.
Communism would be socialism developed to the level that force is no longer utilized in society for anything.

I love it.

Hitler and Mussolini weren't even officially Socialists, unlike the other two would-be kings.
They even went to war against it, and had been valued by the West for being bulwarks against the spread of it.

Your mayor is a socialist. If you're in AOC's district, your House representative is a socialist.

Good luck with that.

No, Adams is not a socialist.

I guess Mamdani identifies as a Democratic Socialist? That's not a representative from the USSR.

You can say AOC is a Democratic Socialist too, but in office since 2019, and we here in the 14th District still aren't a socialist satellite. We're not even like the Scandinavians or the rest of Democratic Socialist Europe, which is basically all of Europe including the Reich Wingers like Hungary, Italy, and Poland, and whatever town Marine Le Pen represents.

Vladimir Lenin called himself a Democratic Socialist.

and $2000 checks are coming your way, but not socialism, redisturbing wealth, because, um, this is different, reich?

Lenin was one of the most monstrous humans to ever live. Stalin was a monster. Hitler we all know all about. Mussolini was a fascist.

Those people can rot in ExtraHell.

I just want a society where no one goes hungry.

Fascism is a variation of socialism. The co-creator of fascism, Giovani Gentile, said he was an improvement on socialism.

There cannot ever be a society with no hunger. If you go for ultimate freedom some people just will not take care of themselves and will starve. If you go for complete authoritarianism, the government has no interest in the rank and file and do not care if people starve or not. That includes all variations of socialism, nazism, fascism and communism.

Everything in between has variations of reason why people starve, either they won't work or the government is to incompetent to take care of everyone. All governments are too incompetent, utterly incapable of taking care of anyone and easily corruptible.

However, when people are freer they tend to actually help the poor, especially family members and friends. The more authoritarian the more think that is the government's job and they stop being charitable. Too many of those people think government force is charity, it is not. Charity cannot be forced.