I don't know how much you know about the troubled relationship between Russia and Yugoslavia, but importing documents, as he did, that advocated for the overthrow of the State wasn't looked on too kindly. He was sentenced to three months labor as reparations for his infringing the law.

Granted, I don't like the way that society treated freedom of expression. But it is partly analogous to my previous example.

Elections there did actually provide quite a bit of choice, and many people did vote for their community representatives. You have to understand that people were pretty homogeous in their perspective of socialism.

Was it dictatorial? Yes. It was a centrally planned economy with large government intervention, but what was unique with Yugoslavia is that they allowed for privately held property for cooperatives and housing.

Was it tyrannical? I don't think you'll find many people agreeing with that sentiment. School and healthcare were taken care of. Yugoslavia had good productive capacity with a good economy.

That was true, at least until Tito died. After that, everything fell apart because that plurality of cultures only found cohesiveness in a strong and personable leader.