Socialism doesn’t do that — socialism sez you’re just like the things you produce, and easily replaced, hence, unimportant. It’s a breakdown of individualism, in order to keep the elite in power. The only real competition in socialist systems is internal to the political class (and not part of the phony democratic process), and there it is complete ruthlessness.
Individualism and free will and free markets are antithetical for people who liked everything spoonfed from a can.
There is also the western European variety of socialism which uses only mild forms of coercion, no concentration camps or secret police, allows free elections, etc. Their problem, as Margaret Thatcher pointed out, is sooner or later you run out of other people's money, which is why the EU is in crisis now.
I don't think the American socialists like Eugene Debs or Norman Thomas would have emulated Lenin or Stalin--they seem to have been genuinely repelled by what they knew of Stalinism--but of course they never were in a position of political power. Given human nature, I don't think they would have had much success--to the extent that FDR and other Democrats were influenced by them, the impact has been negative (prolonging the Depression and creating unfunded liabilities for entitlements).