I think you are conflating the two because of the case of Soviet Union.
A) Soviet Union was not communism. Communism never happened. Communism/communist society is an ideal.
B) Soviet Union was a totalitarian state, yes.
C) One of the main concepts in communism is that there is/should be no state. Totalitarianism assumes that there is a state. This is in every definition of communism and totalitarianism. Here I'm going to quote it from the first line of each from Wikipedia:
"Totalitarianism is concept of a political system in which the state holds total control over the society"
"Communism ... absence of social classes, money, and the state."
So yeah, "hasn't been done right yet". Could you hypothesize who in a true-scotsman communist non-state would regulate people's output ("ability") & input ("need")? Who would enforce the laws? If "everyone and anyone" is an enforcer, then claiming there is "no state" is sophistry.
A) Soviet Union was not communism. Communism never happened. Communism/communist society is an ideal.
B) Soviet Union was a totalitarian state, yes.
C) One of the main concepts in communism is that there is/should be no state. Totalitarianism assumes that there is a state. This is in every definition of communism and totalitarianism. Here I'm going to quote it from the first line of each from Wikipedia:
"Totalitarianism is concept of a political system in which the state holds total control over the society"
"Communism ... absence of social classes, money, and the state."