Humans progressed under feudalism, as well. That's a nonsense argument.

At best you are doing your own circle jerk of how smart and reasonable and centrist you are. You haven't exactly revealed information that leftists don't already know. You've just severely misunderstood leftism because you haven't ever looked in to it, you are just assuming you already know everything there is to know about it.

The alternative to feudalism was also worse. Does that make feudalism good? Does that make feudalism "the best we can do"? No, if course not.

You are arguing that what we have is the best that we can do because you can't imagine an alternative. But you haven't even tried.

"History is full of full -on socialist regimes in lesser countries that fell". That really sums it up for me. You know nothing about the history of socialism. Because that's s complete nonsense statement. You don't even do the bare minimum of asking "how did they define socialism" and "how did it fail". There was no intellectual process. You just assume you already know everything.

Is it a failure of socialism if the US murders your government?

Is a country socialist because they say they are, or because they perform socialism? Can a country be socialist if it does not fulfill the basic principles of socialism?

Then the final question for you: if socialism is inherently a failure, why does this mean there is no alternative to capitalism? Why is suffering of others (you aren't sacrificing yourself doing near slave labor, it's always somebody else) necessary?

Compare your own country to Bangladesh. Would you accept their working conditions? Why not? Why do you think you deserve better but they don't? Are they not equals?