I've been speaking with other more informed communists and they've told me that none actually exist. Is this true?
China, Laos, and Vietnam: now notoriously capitalists. Workers work 12+ hours with no protection in horrible factory conditions. Suicide rates are so high that suicide nets are installed. The air is so polluted millions die from lung cancer, especially factory workers w/out basic masks. Corporations dominate
North Korea: Undemocratically ruled by the Kim dynasty. Jong un indulges lavishly at the expense of his citizens, ordering millions in fine wine and trips from Denis Rodman. They might be the most socialist though, as Juche seems to otherwise be democratic.
Cuba: Sanctions have taken a massive toll, but even taking that into account the country still has its own problems. They have massive food shortages and inventory probs and aren't self sufficient after 60+ years. Why couldn't they've use machinery imported from the Soviet Union to develop their agriculture and fishery? The Soviets supported them heavily. They seem to be incredibly mismanaged or corrupt
To answer this question, we have to dive into the meaning of the main terms. What does it mean for a country to be communist or socialist?
To start with the term communist: calling a country communist has meant it's run by a communist party, not that it has implemented communism as a classless, stateless society (which could not exist in the context of distinct nations in the first place, by definition). By this definition, China, Cuba, Laos, North Korea, and Vietnam are communist countries.
PS, anyone saying something like "real communism hasn't been tried" doesn't even understand the words they're using and is not themselves a socialist or communist. Instead, they're a confused liberal.
Next, socialist, and the idea of a socialist country. There is actually not a shared and specific definition of what would make a country socialist per se, it's more of a project to deestablish the capitalist class and put the working class in power. Many socialists disagree with one another about whether a given country is socialist, and what is really underlying their thoughts is usually just whether or not they think a country is attempting to deestablish capitalism and/or is making sufficient progress in doing so.
In terms of your specific examples, I'll offer some critiques.
China, Laos, and Vietnam: now notoriously capitalists. Workers work 12+ hours with no protection in horrible factory conditions. Suicide rates are so high that suicide nets are installed. The air is so polluted millions die from lung cancer, especially factory workers w/out basic masks. Corporations dominate
No socialist expects that the country they operate in after revolution will be free of having to work, for there to be no workplace abuses, for there to be no pollution or healthcare problems, or even for corporations to be immediately deestablished. In reality, what is expected is for the ruling party to begin a long process of undermining capitalist relations. One example is to place human needs into guarantees of the state rather than the whims of private corporations. Another is to quell the anarchy of the market through state controls on production. It is expected that the ruling party will rapidly address the key isy that drove the revolution, which has historically been land reform. An example of this in your list is that every person in Vietnam has a right to an amount of land to farm rice for themselves and their family.
You should also consider that these countries do not operate in a vacuum. Instead, they must fight to survive in a world dominated by extreme international violence, typically from capitalist countries. Therefore, countries like China and Vietnam have adopted specific strategies to deal with this intentional influence, i.e. to combat imperialists. China's example is one of economic entanglement and to allow private markets in special economic zones, which will allow tons of capitalist elements and social relations to exist there. This strategy is working out relatively well, however: China has advanced concentrated industry and imperialist countries (e.g. the USA) that usually bomb or sanction their way into countries premised on socialist projects cannot do so without devastating themselves. Vietnam was forced into a similar situation but with less leverage and concentration of industry. This is a result of the legacy of being genocidally bombed by the imperialist powers during their struggle for national liberation. They won that war but arguably lost much of the peace, as the imperialist countries, despite stealing so much from Vietnam, saddled them with large debts as a condition for ending the war. Such debts were used to force more capitalist relations, especially foreign ownership, into Vietnam. This is a common story around the world, where most countries are violently bullied into carrying large debts in order to lose control of their own countries' economies. With all that said, Vietnam is still riledy by a communist party and does distinguish itself from surrounding countries in how it pushes back against capitalist relations and prioritizes its people.
North Korea: Undemocratically ruled by the Kim dynasty. Jong un indulges lavishly at the expense of his citizens, ordering millions in fine wine and trips from Denis Rodman. They might be the most socialist though, as Juche seems to otherwise be democratic.
Nearly all of this is liberal fairytales with little basis. The Kims have high roles in the party but don't act like dictators, more like figureheads. The primary challenge for North Korea isn't the Kims at all, it's the continued occupation of South Korea by the imperialists. Did you know that the Korean War is ongoing and that America won't let South Korea end it? North Korea is brutally sanctioned at the direction of the United States, and this is where its poverty originates. NK outperformed SK for decades (SK was a military dictatorship at the time) and only ran into famine conditions when the USSR fell and the US imposed an all-encompassing, genocidal sanctions regime.
I don't think discussing Juche or the NK political system in general would mean anything until the core misunderstandings are dealt with.
Cuba: Sanctions have taken a massive toll, but even taking that into account the country still has its own problems.
Socialism is not when a country has no problems. Socialists are ruthlessly locked in on practicalies, not utopian wishes.
They have massive food shortages and inventory probs and aren't self sufficient after 60+ years.
This is hardly independent of the sanctions regime and Cuba did not have food security issues for decades until, again, the USSR fell and the US instituted massively broadened sanctions.
Why couldn't they've use machinery imported from the Soviet Union to develop their agriculture and fishery?
They did. Who told you they didn't?
The Soviets supported them heavily.
The Soviets traded with them when the imperialist powers were brutally sanctioning them. Cuba was not a client state being provided with alms. It was a recently decolonized country that had just survived a revolution and needed to build in the context of being treated like one big sugar plantation, brothel, and casino for Americans. They had to develop industry from the ground up and they routinely outperform the richest country in the world on health metrics, their healthcare system, and healthcare research.
They seem to be incredibly mismanaged or corrupt
According to who?
an org they cited has been awarded the Democracy Award and gets funded by the uhhh
the National Endowment for Democracy
lol that's how they get ya. Flooding the English language NGO SEO space with nonsense so that unsuspecting liberals get taken for a ride.
Then we get to deprogram them, kicking and screaming!
But they make it so easy, how did they find a fucking NED funded Korean org oml
I think it really is cynical SEO stuff. These groups write white papers that use very specific terminological tropes that help them pop up if you search for things like:
-
North Korea Human Rights
-
Is North Korea Communist?
-
Is North Korea a Dictatorship?
That kind of thing. Then they boost themselves into Wikipedia by taking to journos or sometimes just literally citing their white papers, which just amplifies the SEO.
We should take lessons from this stuff, lefty orgs can do the exact same thing by just using the right terms, making sites look professional/academic, and making friends with some journalists. Make the first search result for "Palestine is complex" be a site that says, "nope" in 30 different ways.
the problem is mostly google, they can just selectively suppress our articles or just keep making sure the usual are the only ones making the front page
They've rigged the game, although that doesn't mean we can't still try to play, just means we need to cheat somehow
That's true but I bet Wikipedia would be a good vector. Make them choose between suppressing the entire wiki article for a topic vs. showing everyone lefty stuff.
-
Can you be more specific about which 10 principles? Bunch of different people claim to have such a thing.
I would head some things off in the last question, though. Why should we want a "normal" society? Shouldn't we fight for liberation, which necessarily falls outside current norms? Shouldn't we allow societies freedom to structure themselves in different ways under a framework of liberation? Imposing a "normal" society reminds me of Residential Schools, the attempt to destroy indigenous societies through Western indoctrination and removal from their families.
The other thing to think about is the meaning of democracy, as the term is laden with a huge amount of propaganda and weaponization of thought patterns. I see Westerners call projects they work on democratic because sometimes people get to vote on parts of it even though power truly rests with, say, the people funding it or the people using interpersonal influence to direct the actual work to the exclusion of the voters. I see those same Westerners use cliches of "authoritarianism" to describe countries that actually respond to people's needs while their own country ignores their own needs but buys their complacency with a limited voting system. I think we should question how the term is used and what we really mean by it, as well as whether our definitions of it mean that a space is actually made better through adopting allegedly democratic practices. Does it involve the people? Does it give them sufficient power? Does it defend against oppression? Is it a tool of oppression? These questions must be answered before a particular idea of democracy can be implicitly considered a good thing.
As an example, I don't remember voting to or otherwise being able to use the existing system to prevent the genocide the Palestinian people, but most people seem to be very comfortable calling the US a democracy. I do remember being taught white supremacist narratives in school as if they were fact - do my peers that got duped participate in a democracy if they have been throughly propagandized? What if they have no time outside of work to investigate anything? Etc etc.
So you do fundamentally agree that democracy is good, correct? And you would be opposed to a society where a ruling class pretended it was sanctioned by the working class, right?
Anyway, here are the 10 principles as they were originally written. How do you feel about them?
- We must give our all in the struggle to unify the entire society with the revolutionary ideology of the Great Leader Kim Il Sung.
- We must honor the Great Leader comrade Kim Il Sung with all our loyalty.
- We must make absolute the authority of the Great Leader comrade Kim Il Sung.
- We must make the Great Leader comrade Kim Il Sung's revolutionary ideology our faith and make his instructions our creed.
- We must adhere strictly to the principle of unconditional obedience in carrying out the Great Leader comrade Kim Il Sung's instructions.
- We must strengthen the entire party's ideology and willpower and revolutionary unity, centering on the Great Leader comrade Kim Il Sung.
- We must learn from the Great Leader comrade Kim Il Sung and adopt the communist look, revolutionary work methods and people-oriented work style.
- We must value the political life we were given by the Great Leader comrade Kim Il Sung, and loyally repay his great political trust and thoughtfulness with heightened political awareness and skill.
- We must establish strong organizational regulations so that the entire party, nation and military move as one under the one and only leadership of the Great Leader comrade Kim Il Sung.
- We must pass down the great achievement of the revolution by the Great Leader comrade Kim Il Sung from generation to generation, inheriting and completing it to the end.
So you do fundamentally agree that democracy is good, correct?
I don't think you really read what I wrote, lol. I said that the entire concept of what is democratic should be challenged and questioned.
And you would be opposed to a society where a ruling class pretended it was sanctioned by the working class, right?
You'd have to make this coherent with a class analysis. If the ruling class is pretending to have the support of the working class, i.e. is not itself of the working class, then what class is ruling? There is no general answer to this question, you must apply it to a real country with its class divisions.
Anyway, here are the 10 principles as they were originally written. How do you feel about them?
They make me feel... bored? They were/are a line taken against perceived discontent factions, with the figure of Kim Il-Sung used as a cudgel to say, "shut the fuck up". I guess they also remind me of the silly things that ignorant Westerners believe about North Korea and of the power of choosing words during translation.
Regarding your complaint about the 10 principles, can you demonstrate that they were not translated to your personal preference? And does that mean, as they are written, you do object to them?
I understand that their existence is extremely inconvenient to you, as you are attempting to fall back on liberal identity politics in order to ignore them. But I would prefer it if you didn't attempt to dodge the question.
I didn't list a complaint. I'm just familiar with the fun that Westerners have with, for example, using the term "worship" when it is just as validly (arguably more valid given the lack of religious implications in general) translated as "respect" or "admire". Westerners are very gullible, you see, and love to think of themselves as superior to the Asian hordes, which includes constructing cartoonish ideas of designated enemy countries.
None of that list is inconvenient for me, lol. You seem to be talking to yourself and hyping yourself up because you think you have a slam dunk and in the process are failing to read or understand what I've written. Remember, my answer to your question of how I feel about them is that it makes me bored. Perhaps you should take a little more time to read what is written before claiming anyone is dodging, lol.
It looks like you're spamming this same question to others, seemingly without it being relevant to what they're talking about. Have you considered addressing anything I wrote in the comment you initially replied to? You didn't actually do that, you know.
In other words, you would have a problem with the country telling its people to worship a strong man, but you wouldn't have a problem with a strong man in general being put at the head of a state?
Do you believe the working class, in general, requires paternalism in order to correctly flourish?
Do you believe vocal criticism of a country's leader should be allowed or not?
Can you be specific about what fundamental principles of democracy you question? You just said America doesn't really have a democracy, so you were implying that more democracy would be a good thing.
So you don't actually believe that? And if that's the case, why did you signal as if you did? It seems pretty disingenuous to me
Can you be specific about what fundamental principles of democracy you question?
I already wrote some out in my first reply to you. Do you have any thoughts on them?
You just said America doesn't really have a democracy, so you were implying that more democracy would be a good thing.
Incorrect on both counts. What I did was say that the language and concept itself are laden with propaganda and selective or incomplete application, raising serious doubts about what it even means.
An interesting aspect to your responses here is that you're repeatedly reading things that I didn't say while not recognizing the things I did say. This is very relevant my attempt to head off simplistic acceptance of, say, "democracy". The point is that there are a lot of propaganda narratives and unjustified (implicit) assumptions that tend to get made and your inability to have a conversation with me is a good example of this. You're clearly trying to slot what I'm saying to you into your existing framework, a precious epistemology, even when it doesn't really make sense. This is another thought pattern you'll have to leave behind if you want to have correct opinions or even just be capable of talking to other humans about politics.
So you don't actually believe that? And if that's the case, why did you signal as if you did? It seems pretty disingenuous to me
Having made no effort to understand my pretty simple and direct statements, you're deciding to blame me for your confusion, lol.
This situation is fairly simple: you think you're here to "own" your perceived enemies and are now reaching at straws because it's not going the way you hoped. Gotta find some way for me to be the bad guy, eh kid?
Okay, so regarding democracy, when you said you didn't vote to allow a genocide in Gaza, were you saying a vote should have been taken, thus making the United States a more democratic country?
If that's the case, then we agree that more democracy is good. If that's not the case, why did you bring it up?
weren't these made during a liberation war?
Anyway, here are the 10 principles as they were originally written. How do you feel about them?
That's weird they wrote em in English
No, what's weird is you won't answer my question.
Perhaps you know that on one hand, if you condemn these, you will have become an apostate in the eyes of North Korea stans...
Condem what?, I have no idea what this is, or how it applies to DRPK governance. Some of the language is kinda sus but again its just standing alone out there, translated by whomever, and most importantly not written as legal language. Next you'll be wanting me to condemn the word authority or some such nonsense. You keep posting this like it's some sort of gotcha. The us constitution read uncritically seems nice but it is real shit.
Here read this for some commie law writing:
https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1936/12/05.htm
Unless you are admitting to not reading any of the previous posts before you replied, you know exactly what it is.
Instead of deflecting, let's talk about the 10 principles and whether you find them acceptable or not. I understand this might cause some discomfort for you, because for some reason, many leftists like to treat the doctrine of many countries like holy scripture that must not be condemned, or must be interpreted in a certain way. I'm not that kind of religious person, though.
Why would you expect them to answer your questions? I was talking to you, not them.
How do you feel about the 10 principles? Are they something that a normal, democratic society would adopt?
Did anyone leave behind a child? We've got a lost kid here, very confused and scared.
you're doing the thing again, you aren't clever, come back here
can you stop being a bleating goat or will you finally grow your own brain?
I understand that you use the same logic as Sartre describes in other bigots, so I don't expect you to engage with the 10 principles and simply attempt to deny them, deflect from them, call the sources Zionist propaganda, etc.
Would you like to engage in good faith, or am I 100% correct in my assessment of you
im a trans woman but yeah sure im a bigot because some white toddler got his politics from a youtube video and apparently the CIA
Im not a nice one, im here to call you a bitch.
Why are you bringing up your identity?
Since you want to do that, would you rather live in a country with LGBT policies like Russia, or one more like Sweden?
Why are you bringing up your identity?
you seem to be casting my identity as a bigot, I responded.
Russia isn't socialist, Sweden has a terrible record for handling autistic people, of which I am among.
Oh... So you believe Blair White is not a bigot.
We can talk about the CCP and how it disappeared one of its most substantial LGBT activists. Or the laws against girly men on TV.
Oh... So you believe Blair White is not a bigot.
We can talk about the CCP and how it disappeared one of its most substantial LGBT activists. Or the laws against girly men on TV.
Oh... So you believe Blair White is not a bigot.
We can talk about the CCP and how it disappeared one of its most substantial LGBT activists. Or the laws against girly men on TV.
No, you obviously haven't, so I won't. Renounce the citation of the CIA and we can discuss again.
this moron just used the fucking NED as a source ban this dumbass
This post is bait and both velociraptor and anarchost are clearly bad actors spreading disinfo to push sectarianism and to try to drive a wedge between western leftists and AES states. Newish accounts obsessed with just-asking-questions; questions that precisely align with propaganda being pushed by the United States government.
true, but its an easy and ample opportunity to debunk this for our comrades, they have the easiest shit anyway
China, Laos, and Vietnam: now notoriously capitalists. Workers work 12+ hours with no protection in horrible factory conditions. Suicide rates are so high that suicide nets are installed. The air is so polluted millions die from lung cancer, especially factory workers w/out basic masks. Corporations dominate
Which news lead you to this? 20 years ago?
Define capitalism, and then describe the economic system in Vietnam. I am curious what reality you exist in.
China, Laos, and Vietnam.... Suicide rates are so high that suicide nets are installed
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Map_of_countries_by_suicide_rate,WHO(2019).svg
https://www.goldengate.org/district/district-projects/suicide-deterrent-net/
North Korea: Undemocratically ruled
North Korea is ruled by the Supreme People's Assembly (최고인민회의) which is directly elected.
Cuba..... Why couldn't they've use machinery imported from the Soviet Union to develop their agriculture and fishery?
No reason not to. Lots of Soviet farm machinery there.
I can give a longer response when I'm not on mobile, but so I know where to start: what have you read? What sources have you read about China's economy, for instance?
How do you feel about this North Korean doctrine?
- We must give our all in the struggle to unify the entire society with the revolutionary ideology of the Great Leader Kim Il Sung.
- We must honor the Great Leader comrade Kim Il Sung with all our loyalty.
- We must make absolute the authority of the Great Leader comrade Kim Il Sung.
- We must make the Great Leader comrade Kim Il Sung's revolutionary ideology our faith and make his instructions our creed.
- We must adhere strictly to the principle of unconditional obedience in carrying out the Great Leader comrade Kim Il Sung's instructions.
- We must strengthen the entire party's ideology and willpower and revolutionary unity, centering on the Great Leader comrade Kim Il Sung.
- We must learn from the Great Leader comrade Kim Il Sung and adopt the communist look, revolutionary work methods and people-oriented work style.
- We must value the political life we were given by the Great Leader comrade Kim Il Sung, and loyally repay his great political trust and thoughtfulness with heightened political awareness and skill.
- We must establish strong organizational regulations so that the entire party, nation and military move as one under the one and only leadership of the Great Leader comrade Kim Il Sung.
- We must pass down the great achievement of the revolution by the Great Leader comrade Kim Il Sung from generation to generation, inheriting and completing it to the end.
Can you provide a source for this? No use in responding if we don't even know if it's real
do not use those links, one has no citations and the other is from an organization funded by the National Endowment for Democracy
The content of North Korean doctrine seems particularly discomforting to people here, lol. Not sure why this is the country people feel the need to stand up for
https://web.archive.org/web/20141022133221/http://www2.law.columbia.edu/course_00S_L9436_001/North%20Korea%20materials/10%20principles%20of%20juche.html
https://web.archive.org/web/20170906180510/http://www.internationallawbureau.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/Ten-Great-Principles-of-the-Establishment-of-the-Unitary-ideology.pdf
DID YOU JUST POST THE CIA SOURCES A SECOND FUCKING TIME
lol that second link is the US state department, you're a rube.
they literally linked an org funded by the National Endowment for Democracy
"A lot of what we do today was done covertly 25 years ago by the CIA" - then NED president Allen Weinstein
NED's President Carl Gershman said that the NED was created because "It would be terrible for democratic groups around the world to be seen as subsidized by the CIA."It's literally a group that does CIA stuff, without using the CIA name.
You claim that the NED is CIA, but have you considered that the link above is not literally cia.gov?
You just doubled down on using Holocaust denial logic. I wonder why.
But let me be more specific. You believe "The government did something bad once, therefore anything I can tie to the government was also done by the government." Nazis also hate the fact the US entered World War II.
Okay, then link to the 10 principles yourself.
Nazis use the same logic as you to say Hitler never ordered the Holocaust. Why are you using Nazi logic?
Lol I'm not the one that gives a ahit about it, or brought it up. Go back to
So you concede to the fact you are using the same logic as Nazis in the same way is Nazis, and your only response is "I don't care"?
So you concede to the fact you are using the same logic as Nazis in the same way is Nazis, and your only response is "I don't care"?
So, I want to engage in as good of faith possible, here.
The content of North Korean doctrine seems particularly discomforting to people here, lol. Not sure why this is the country people feel the need to stand up for.
It's not about whether it's discomforting, it's about whether or not what you're saying is even true. I have zero reason to believe what you posted has any basis in fact. You initially copy/pasted it with no citation.
Now, the links you're giving are decidedly not Korean. The DPRK puts out works of theory and the like, fairly readily. All I'm asking for is a primary source for this.
But let's assume it's 100% true, for a minute.
Even if it is, and Korean socialism does look the way that these 10 points describe, why might that be? What would drive such an insular, personality-cult driven, set of doctrine?
Could it, perchance, be the fact that the United States set about occupying half of the Korean Peninsula? Reinstalling many of the Japanese colonial administrators the Korean people had just spent decades trying to kick out?
Might it have something to do with the fact that the US bombed the entire peninsula so heavily, that US pilots complained that they were no more targets, and that Koreans literally began living in caves and a result?
If you actually care about Koreans, and are unsettled by the centralization of power in the DPRK, then you ought to recognize that it's US imperial policy that has irrevocably shaped the destiny of the Korean peninsula.
If there's any reason to "Stand up" for the DPRK, it's for the exact reasons you've laid out. If a society is too heal, and overcome the sort of backward despotism you've presented, then the answer is surely to not isolate it more. To not continue to fuel the siege mentality that drives the state ideology. But rather, to work for peace and unification, so that the whole of Korea might, once again, be able to shape its own destiny.
So I read through his links. There isn't a citation to any of these interviews (a necessity for actual academic journalism) to make sure things aren't being taken out of context. The first document even says that "North Korean experts disagree with these things because they view North Korea through the lens of their propaganda." And even then there are only three uncited interviews, one which is obviously an absolutely outrageous lie that breaking the frame of a photo of Kim Jon Il while polishing it is grounds for the execution of an entire family.
For context, the atrocities of the Pinochet regime are backed up by literally hundreds of recorded, cited interviews, some even by guards who participated in the violence admitting their culpability years later (though usually with the excuse that they weren't the ones committing the mass rape, etc.).
This is nothing. This is unsubstantial.
"North Korea has shitty policies because it has been isolated from the rest of the world," is a statement that I agree wholeheartedly with, and yes it should be opened to things like international trade. The same holds true for Cuba, etc.
I am surprised you are allowed to believe North Korea is a shitty country with shitty policies
But unless you have the bigotry of low expectations, you should be expecting more out of the country
https://web.archive.org/web/20170906180510/http://www.internationallawbureau.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/Ten-Great-Principles-of-the-Establishment-of-the-Unitary-ideology.pdf
https://www.ned.org/2018-democracy-award/2018-democracy-award-honoree-citizens-alliance-for-north-korean-human-rights-nkhr/
you realize that second link is from an article funded by the fucking NATIONAL ENDOWMENT FOR DEMOCRACY
you literally referenced the CIA front for false flag operations and fake organizations
Im fucking giddy are you this stupid on accident or born with a badge?
THE FUCKING NATIONAL ENDOWMENT FOR DEMOCRACY
eheheheheheheheeeeeeeeeee oh my god this is so fuckin easy
You remind me of the Nazi who skims articles looking for a Jewish sounding name so they can dismiss it outright. Do you have any contention with the content of the article, or is ad hominem really the best thing you can come up with?
Rightful criticism of a known CIA front org is the same thing as Nazi persecution of Jewish people is one hell of a take
Seriously, get a fuckin grip
Both you and the Nazi will point to any name they can associate with the source of a document, and use it to claim it should not be taken seriously. The only difference is that they call it removed globalism, and you call it bourgeois westerners.
Are you denying the existence of the 10 principles? If you are not, are you complaining about the translation?
If your source is funded by the CIA i don't care
and you're a braindead bitch if you think you can just compare everyone to nazis without sounding like a toddler
I know you don't care. You are not a leftist, after all, which is very obvious when comparing the way you dismiss sources with identical reasoning as Nazis, and refuse to participate in the conversation.
I think this says very little of substance besides "our Great Leader is cool, Juche is cool, we must protect the revolution". Oh, and supporting central organization. What do you think it says?
5 is the only one that looks iffy to me. I guess you could say 3 too, but honestly they are a little redundant.
Can you provide a source for this so-called Supreme People's Assembly being democratically elected?
Who is allowed to be elected? Can the ruling party remove people from the ballot, ensuring their own elites remain in power forever?
And while you're taking questions, is there seriously a North Korean "Socialist Patriotic Youth League"?
have you ever actually studied the DPRK government, or did you watch a youtube and rely on pop culture politics?
They cannot remove people from the ballot
youth leagues are awesome
no I don't think I'll try anymore
I ended my effortposting when I found out you cited the CIA, just find another source just fucking google it, how are you this incapable
provide your sources for your original counterargument
also
denounce your CIA citation, then we'll talk
I am the fish and I hope one day I can repent for my posting sins
i didn't realize that was your pfp lol, thats funny
Can you provide documentation proving each of those is anything but a capitalist country, preferably using evidence that would not also include Nazi Germany
China, Laos, and Vietnam: now notoriously capitalists. Workers work 12+ hours with no protection in horrible factory conditions. Suicide rates are so high that suicide nets are installed.
I just want to say it's really funny that libs refer to Taiwan as China when it suits them. The specific Foxconn factory that was the center of this mess was in Taiwan and universities produced an 84 page report that investigated the matter when it blew up, one of the major reasons cited for the suicides in the report was discrimination against mainlanders occurring within the "labour camp" (their words) that was being operated there where taiwanese were privileged over mainlanders used for cheaper labour that they could exploit harder thanks to taiwan's administration being dogshit on regulations. Source: https://web.archive.org/web/20100921055650/http://hk.stockstar.com/2010/05/2510087523186.shtml
Lol. Lmao.
It's particularly funny yeah. There was later a suicide at the Shenzhen foxconn plant but I think it was only 1 or 2 there that were only notable because of the 10+ in a single week that occurred at the Taiwan plant, followed by dozens of others spread out. Libs like to pretend the major issue was on the mainland by using the Shenzhen plant when the reality is this all mainly occurred because taiwan has significantly worse regulations and is sussy as fuck when it comes to their behaviour to outside people. Let's not forget the nazi parades in schools.
I’ve been speaking with other more informed communists and they’ve told me
Lol this reads like social engineering to shift perception of ingroup mores. I guess I’m paranoid after seeing that Atlantic Council whitepaper calling for greater control of the fediverse.
I agree with your suspicion. Between the op being pretty obvious anticommunist bait and then that asshole arguing in incredibly bad faith about some alleged "10 principles" that supposedly guide all of politics in the dprk, I would guess that the reason this post exists is that people paid to post western propaganda on the internet are here doing exactly that.
The Zapstist "Caracoles" are societies that live under their own goberment, based on the ideas of the EZLN, the bast mayority of them are located in the state of Chiapas, in the south of México
yeah, like yesterday, citing a mysterious uptick in gang violence
so basically the CIA used drug cartels to kill the Zapatistas
i thought it was just some of their autonomous municipalities, not the entire organisation or did i misunderstand the news?
Its the whole area, but I don't expect them to be gone, they are definitely regrouping, but I don't expect their enemies to be passive at this time.
god, the second global war on socialism is fucking depressing
From what I have seen, what has been dissolved are the JBG and the MAREZ, which are the civil arm of the EZLN, the "caracoles" and the militar arm of the EZLN have not dissolved and will not do so, but they are closed to the outside, everything seems to be part of the fight against the cartels and for the autonomy of the Zapatistas territories, I would not be surprised to see the restructuring of their civil structure in order to face the threat of the cartels, or, in a slightly more radical scenario, the restructuring along with a new call for uprising against the violence of the cartels and the Mexican state and for the self-defense of the Zapatistas territories in the coming months since it is had make clear that this decision is already several years in the making.
A warning: They are trying to DM instead of actually respond in comment, ignore them.
what dms did they send you catra?
- Show
one of these in there is my reply but counts as theirs so please ignore it
Show
i looked through the other stuff in the thread and this basically sums up their participation in the entire thread lmao:
Show
There's Marinaleda, which has been true to its word from the very start.
OP you are a loser, those DMs you were sending were cringe as fuck and I think you suck as a person :)
The people you've been talking to aren't "more informed" they're a bunch of clowns lol.
None of Europe is socialist. It is all capitalist.
The communism you're referring to here seems to be the notion of a stateless, classless society. This is, by definition, incompatible with the existence of a nation-state, so the idea of such a country is oxymoronic and not what any communist would say reflects their politics - not now and not historically. It's a liberal confusion, as liberals know basically nothing about politics and substitute mass media memes and vibes in its stead.
Another person here claims Vietnam is socialist, despite being a social democracy. Why is it that one country gets a pass, but the other one does not? Is it really about the labels that nations affix to themselves?
Feel free to revisit my original comment in this thread where I go over what is meant by "socialist country". Funnily enough, it's the first comment of mine you replied to, though you didn't address anything I said in it and instead just started asking stupid questions. At least you're consistent!
Another person here claims Vietnam is socialist, despite being a social democracy. Why is it that one country gets a pass, but the other one does not?
Most of Europe is pretty heavily socialist.
what timeline do you live in?
you're confusing socialism for social democracy. social democracy comes at the expense of large scale exploitation of the third world through neo-colonial imperialism, so it is still capitalism
Marx uses the words Socialism and Communism pretty much interchangeably (Engels a little less so). But Europe hasn't been either since about 1990
