You seem mighty confused. Communism is impossible without achieving post-scarcity, and you know full well we haven't achieved that yet.

Communism doesn't exactly promise anything. It is a sci-fi imagining of what the world will look like in a post-scarcity world. Star Trek is a more modern adaptation on the same idea. Would you say Star Trek promises us something? Notably what communism does imagine, though, is that there is no state.

If you read back in the comments, you'll see we're not talking talking about communism at all, rather "communist state". As before, communism rejects the concept of having a state, so you know we cannot possibly be talking about communism. Instead, "communist state" usually refers to a country under rule by the Communist Party. As Chile was ruled by a Marxist inside a Communist Party coalition we said that was likely close enough for what the earlier commenter was trying to convey.

Chile was a technocratic democracy then. Is that paradise? That is in the eye of the beholder, I suppose, but it must have been pretty good else why would the USA have wanted it to dismantle it so badly, undoing what was, at the time, one of the most stable democracies around?