First, it is crucial to understand that socialism is not a system but a symptom, a symptom omnipresent in capitalism and vice versa, as I have explained ad nauseam in my previous answers on the topic.
The presumptive portrayal of socialism as a system would require a universally understood and agreed definition of such a system. Say, like soccer is a system of gameplay identified by specific rules, regulations, enforcement, and outcomes. None of that exists in the fuzzy realm of what people currently refer to as socialism. So, the first fragment of my answer to the appeal of socialism is that many people have no universal understanding of what socialism is, and identify socialism with vague and hollow consequential correlations to benefits like “free” healthcare.
We humans like to throw these manmade concepts around without a universally understood implication of its definition and usage. As in the many wild interpretations of freedom, capitalism, socialism, communism, behavioralism, economics, or markets, all without a universally accepted meaning attached to them. We then turn those concepts from inanimate into animate objects as if to give them more credence, while at the same yielding the unpredictability of a mind of its own, as animate objects are known to produce. Or apply even more illustrious fallacies like “the invisible hand,” as the grandiose excuse to the logic of a “system” not quite yielding its expected outcome.
Let me warn you, whenever inanimate objects are referred to as animate objects; you are led down a path of yet another manmade religion as the source of depravity reason, and worse, with another debilitating and self-deprecating smokescreen towards the discovery of a better proxy of evolutionary truth.
Second, and back to my initial statement, socialism is nothing more than a reliance on groupthink. The same kind of groupthink that is omnipresent in the deployment of capital and other vital human interactions.
Some forms of groupthink and behavior (again, as the symptom of socialism) are actually beneficial to humanity, for they have helped humanity build the collective strength of a group, imperative to the existence of our species and one of the reasons why we, Homo Sapiens, are believed to have split off from our Neanderthal and Great Ape cousins.
So, there is clear evidence of how the collective strength of humans as a group is instrumental and thus deemed appealing, to our emergence as a species. The problem with our implementation, however, is that our forms of socialism are non-renewable by having left socialism so ill-defined. As in expecting the gameplay of soccer to be pleasant to watch when no players nor the referee have been informed of its rules beforehand. The reason why our longevity as a species, despite our superior intellect, is currently expected to be no more than one-tenth of our Ape cousins.
The evolution of humanity is subjugated to the rules nature has bestowed on us. Which demands the strengths of our renewability must support the prolonging of our sustainability. And that means we must build the best systems we can to balance all individual strengths with our collective strength.
We must stop the voodoo of make-believe, with meaningless or hollow terms stuffed with undesirable compounding consequences and instead build human operating-systems with well-defined principles, aligned to those with nature, that maximize the extraordinary things mankind can discover.