socialism is understood that considers all of the ownership of this world is shared ownership, no private rights exist in socialism, private ownership is taboo in socialism, so it will be very difficult to understand socialism to have privacy.
This understanding is very difficult to be applied to the idea of democracy, the idea of democracy is still recognizes that there is privacy on the individual person, but between democracy and socialism have in common one considers that the voice of the people is the voice of god ...
This understanding is very difficult to be applied to the idea of democracy, the idea of democracy is still recognizes that there is privacy on the individual person, but between democracy and socialism have in common one considers that the voice of the people is the voice of god ...
A lot of confusion there. As the previous user said, you can have personal property in socialism and you can most certainly have privacy. What you can't have is private ownership of the means of production. Workers would own and manage their work places. And production would be directed for consumption, and not for gaining profit. In this sense, socialism isn't incompatible with democracy but simply a different way to run a society, while trying to minimize inequality.
I agree with your assessment, but I think the reason you don't see strong state socialism in a strong democracy is that the state is too corrupted in such a situation. Those with power are seldom (if ever) in the same boat with the people they make the rules for, but with state socialism this disparity is even less tolerable since the the point of the system is to share the means of production much more equitably than ever happens.