Khrushchev N.S. "The Construction of Communism in the USSR and the Development of Agriculture," 1963.

My dear Neo... I mean, Berserk, sorry... Have you tried opening this book? It specifically states that communism in the USSR is being built, understand? It's only being built, and the existing system is characterized as developed socialism. Interestingly, everyone who lived in the USSR (I'm talking about people who remember the USSR and weren't infants at the time) knew this, but you

I'm seeing for the first time someone who says that it wasn't communism in the USSR, but socialism.

Added 31 minutes ago

The main goal of most modern democracies is to create a society with equal STARTING opportunities, i.e., a society where everyone can become a janitor or a president.

Why even president? Try to get into MGIMO, for example... on a merit basis. Or, to save time, find out whose children study there – it's no secret, our elite doesn't hide the fact that they provide well for their children. But, of course, because of the children of politicians and officials, there are no places left for ordinary victims of democracy, unfortunately.
You know, we all start equally... but "some are more equal than others." (c)

The state should only take care of (in the sense of providing benefits) those who, for example, are limited in their ability to realize their potential due to disability.

That's strange, but developed European countries don't think so.
They, for example, support a significant increase in the birth rate with very generous benefits. They encourage successful students and schoolchildren (not with a meager stipend that a student spends on beer, but by admitting them to the best educational institutions, offering free education in prestigious universities or colleges, conducting professional development programs with them, etc.).
They help not only the disabled, that is, people who are useless to the state, but also, on the contrary, the most useful, which is quite logical. In our case, they conduct a kind of Darwinian natural selection: sharpen your teeth – and go ahead, fight your way through! But why should a talented mathematician, physicist, or programmer necessarily be a heavily armored tank? As a result, we get "winners" who are not the most capable, but the most cunning, who have managed to undermine, adapt, and use someone's "paw." And as a result – our science and industry. It's inevitable.
But in the USSR, my grandfather, who came from a family of absolutely ordinary people, not even from the intelligentsia – from workers, entered a university, studied excellently, brilliantly completed graduate school, and became a professor at the age of 37, as far as I remember. If someone doesn't know, this is very early; most people reach the professorship after 40, or even 50. He was a man of incredible erudition and intellect, but at the same time, he probably would not have been able to break through into the ranks of highly paid careerists in the current system – he was very intelligent, tactful, and absolutely not aggressive.
By the way, at that time, his salary alone (without many allowances) was 500 rubles (those who lived in the 70s and 80s know that this was a lot of money), and now a professor in our country cannot afford even quality treatment on his salary (as far as I know, he earns less than $500, and significantly less).
Yes, in the USSR, science and industry were at a decent level. Now, our country produces only one thing – money. 90% of my circle are managers, marketers, financial analysts, etc. – people who only make money circulate and don't create anything.