Socialism on its surface is something that appears appealing and has a certain allure to certain people. It certainly seems fair that in socialism since we are all in it together, that we should therefore equally share in the wealth of our nation, its productivity and its output, with no unnatural exploitation. As for statists, their system of government is one that believes that the state should guide and monitor what should or shouldn't be accomplished within one's society, ostensibly for the benefit of that same society, all under the firm hand of the State.
While offhand, socialism and statists don't appear to be of the same design, they are to a remarkable extent, necessary for each other. First off, picture yourself in a socialist society, in which in theory no one person is the owner and each of you collectively owns everything. While initially that sounds like a really good deal, it isn't necessarily fair, because each of you collectively has the responsibility to create wealth and prosperity for society, in which some people are going to be much better at applying themselves and working more diligently to create better throughput and productivity. While in the natural course of events, harder, smarter, more efficient, and more effective workers should directly benefit from their efforts, ina socialist society, at the end of the day, everyone will share equally in this prosperity despite the fact that some have provided significantly more than others.
Additionally, while this prosperity and wealth is being created in the socialist society in which all are benefiting equally, who is it that decides how the pie is actually going to be divvied up? Not only do you have that significant issue to deal with, you will also quickly determine that we don't all like the same things, or the same activities, or have the same priorities, or have the same families, or the same habits, or the same desires, or the same health, so there will be significant and meaningful differences between us. We are in short, not the same people in make or model.
Still, in a socialist society in which all share from the same well, someone will have to be in charge. While you might reason that nobody really wants that position, or that the position will rotate over given time periods, in actuality the position will gravitate to those that have the mindset to perform these duties. In small and ancient societies, we called these people, our elders, our chiefs, our wise men, or our gods. Today, in a modern society, we no longer use these terms, we instead owe our allegiance to our modern State. The State will decide how our resources will be divvied up and by doing so they will create an ongoing and pernicious bureaucracy that will suck legitimate assets away from the people that produce these products in order to better the State, the agents of the State, and the people as the State sees fit.
When collectively you own everything, this means by definition that individually you own nothing. When you own nothing you are at the mercy and the control of those who will decide your fate and your usefulness for society at large. As a socialist, you are nothing, and consequently socialism is the perfect state for statists, in whom, if you are fortunate, they will apply their boot to your neck with a benign smile, and if you're not so fortunate, they will eviscerate you.