The rough gist I'm getting is some poorly substantiated claim of ignorance of general exploitation as worse than overt abuse of human rights, eg

Yes, comrade, I'm locking you up and abusing your fundamental rights, but think how bad you'd have it free, doing the same work with a better standard of living & lower economic inequality while whining about exploitation!

Perhaps workers could earn better without "exploitation" in liberal democracies, but historical record & economic data show the opposite:

• the Soviet system stagnated & deteriorated behind liberal democratic counterparts at living standards & economic growth while still exploiting workers & abusing their fundamental rights
• several liberal democracies continue to achieve lower economic inequality & better living standards than communist states.

The Soviet Union gave up & dismantled itself for this reason. There was no tradeoff of human rights abuses somehow yielding a better life for a less exploited, average worker. For all its rhetoric, the Soviet workers got the worst of everything.

Per the philosophy of social democracies, socialism doesn't require human rights abuses. Authorities abusing human rights are definitely worse than authorities not doing that & letting people fail on their own terms. In the case of those liberal democracies beating the performance of communist states, those "exploited" workers are freer & doing better than the "unexploited" ones. Given the results, it's hard to find your notion of "exploitation" credible: I think it's full of shit & mostly in your deluded theory that's failing to bear out.