No they were not...none of the examples you gave were democratic Republics that were based on the Rule of Law, so I'm not sure what's to discuss here.

Comparing the US today with Soviet Russia under Stalin or NK under Kim is so ill-informed its impossible to process.

North Korea is known as "The Democratic People's Republic of Korea". All of the others listed self-identified as democratic nations in the respective periods I refer to. In the USSR, the Communist party was "elected" time and time again, in "democratic" elections. They had a "mandate from the people".

To completely disregard any comparison because "they're bad and we're good" is so dogmatic and jingoistic it's impossible to process.

Edit: And I see in a parallel comment you say re: the US justice system "They (the courts and prosecutors) Do What They Want"

Would you really quantify that as the rule of law, or as arbitrary rule?

And to try and stretch a comparison simply because they have the word "Democratic" in their name is so ignorant of reality that it's impossible to process.

> Would you really quantify that as the rule of law, or as arbitrary rule?

It's somewhat arbitrary within a pretty solid framework, if you want my opinion.

My OP and this thread was about macro-level rule of law, my other comment was micro-level obviously.

No one is talking about "bad and good" here, I'm just saying you cannot compare them as you have attempted to do, as the fundamental differences defy equivalence.