All the states that have attempted Socialism or Communism have gone down the same route. Strong concentration of power in the centre, single-party rule, State ownership of industry and agricullture, Party before the person.

The name for that is Fascism.

Socialism is where the people control the means of production, distribution and exchange. This effectivelty means that economic policy is devolved to the lowest practical level - the community. What to produce, how much of it to produce, how much is kept for the communitys' use and how much is exchanged with which other communities for other needed commodities is left up to each community to decide among themselves.

Matters for broader concern would be in the hands of bodies elected and appointed by the communities involved and answerable to the communities, all the way up to national level, all answerable to the comunities they serve, with decisions taken at the lowest practical level.

Not a one-party government, but a no-party government. Distribution of work and reward on the basis "from each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs".

It's a pie-in-the-sky system and totally contrary to human nature. It wouldn't work, but it's never been tried.

The system of social democracy that applies in much of Europe, where private enterprise and State provision run side-by-side, has been far more successful. The US system of unregulated capitalism and minimum State provision is leading, as we see, to social collapse. authoritarianism and potential civil war.