Kerala: As you mention, not a country. Also didn't really seize the means of production. But when I think of Communism working well, it's at a local level like this rather than at the level of a country. There are communes and kibbutzes that lasted decades. Generally a tough life but at a small level you can have a government controlling everything without hopefully making as many huge mistakes. Worst case you can more easily just leave if they do (hopefully they let you).

Chile: Also didn't fully seize the means of production, it's more or less a perfect example of a government that's run by a socialist majority for a small amout of time and which enacts socialist measures during that time, but never reaching full communism. This is the kind of thing I would hold up as the ideal case. Socialism for long enough to strengthen the situation of the people, but not long enough to wreck the economy and grow into full blown authoritarianism.

Nepal: Installed by force in the armed uprising against Rana rule in 1951

India: Never seized the means of production (or really got very powerful IMO)

San Marino: Attemped a coup and never seized the means of production.

First off they were installed in the government by force You could really only vote for one party. And usually the elections were to some degree rigged. And the government that did all the nice things you mention also committed genocides, mass starvation, massively oppressed its people, and finally spent so much on its military that they crashed the economy.

Not to say western democracy is perfect (the US is especially flawed these days), but there are a good amount of European countries that instituted many socialist policies democratically without that baggage.

Of course there's a distinction. A partial socialist/communist government has never implement full communism (seize the means of production and guarantee equal distribution of resources). That's only ever been done by force.

They have achieved things like universal health care and education, however, and for that we should all be grateful. IMHO the best case scenario really is a parliamentary system with a socialist majority to get these kind of things passed but leave a heavily regulated capitalist economic system in place.

Yes as I said if we are talking about a share of parliament, that's true. But fully socialist (communist) governments? Only by force so far.

For anything good he will do for food, he will do more damage to the medical profession. And there will have been 10 people in that position by the time Trump is done, so probably he won't accomplish much anyway. In Trump's last term he gutted tons of air and water safety regulations, so there's every reason to expect him to do the same this time.

There's quite a lot of pretty good evidence to back up your point already. When Trump is done there will be plenty more.

Then the US oligarchy under Trump with no environmental or antitrust regulations and bribes from the wealthy deciding policy should be paradise for you.

For my part, I'm happy to have some possibility for safe food and water and some hope of maintaining my privacy and not be forced into using products and services due to the fact that they have monopoly position in the market here in the EU.

Yes I read this only as good news. You'd have to be pretty thick for this to be a major issue for you.

It rubs off on the users too. Anything not absolutely fellating Tim Apple is downvoted to oblivion.

Nice graph with no freaking labels.

Well, not the ultimate Apple circlejerk, r/apple.