I feel like I shouldn't be ignorant about stuff like that when they are playing more and more of a role on the world stage and the US is ramping up hostilities.
I feel like I shouldn't be ignorant about stuff like that when they are playing more and more of a role on the world stage and the US is ramping up hostilities.
Article 3 of the PRC's constitution:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_centralism
This is like reading the bill of rights and then believing americans actually have freedom of speech
It really pisses me off when I get responses that don't actually reply to anything I said but instead seek to just soapbox. This isn't a reply to me, at least not to anything I actually said because I definitely made no value judgement and all I did was tell him what the system was called so he could go do more reading.
Respond to human beings not to some imagined wider audience. It's rude af.
I dunno, they have a point. Ideally I would like something to point to besides a wikipedia article on their constitution, something that's harder to dismiss then going "oh they don't actually follow that." But I don't really know what kind of source that would even be.
It would have to be a massive pile of books.
The only valid thing to do here is to make sure people are informed with the correct terminology for them to be able to research the topic properly. There is no comment-length response that will suffice for a topic that will span dozens of research papers and a small mountain of literature.
deleted by creator
I know. Although for that topic it's rather difficult as the information available is basically non-existent due to the secretive nature of the country. That isn't the case for this topic, all you need to really start digging is the correct terminology for searching.
Whereas we can observe, how the US violates it's Constitution. In case of North Korea you don't have any info except from dissidents. ___
Exactly. Citing their constitution is meaningless because we know many countries do not actually adhere to the text of their constitution, but we also can’t be sure they don’t adhere to theirs because we don’t have clear knowledge of conditions within the country.
Why then critique a socialist state when you have no knowledge about their situation?
You shouldn't. But if you have no knowledge about their situation you also shouldn't praise them, which is what some people attempt to do by citing their constitution without actually knowing whether it is followed in practice. If we cannot get real knowledge about Korea then we should avoid praise or critique, except of course to defend them from imperialism.
Of course I can praise them. A socialist Constitution, even when implemented half as much as the us implements theirs (if history has taught us anything, there is no country behaving worse than the us), it's still a better country for the people than any neoliberal capitalist state.
Soapboxing or just segwaying is not only standard in similar online spaces like Twitter or reddit; it's part of the normal flow of real life conversations. People will talk about whatever the fuck they want to talk about. You're getting mad about rules you made up and don't apply anywhere. This is not your private chat, you don't get to police what kind of responses are acceptable on your precious posts.
Maybe it's a good time to log off for a bit when one is correcting people on their goddamn online manners and asking them to quote your comments like a reddit debate guy.
The irony of this
The irony of this.
Wow, and the IRONY OF THIS.
Those spaces(reddit/twitter) encourage you to pander to the audience because every post is a game you earn a global pts score for. They're specifically designed in an unhealthy way to encourage people to stop talking to each other and to instead pander to the audience of onlookers that will be dishing out (or not) their points.
In the pre-social media period where we all used forums without being trained into that behaviour we actually responded to the person we were sending a message to. We talked. We sent our messages with the intention of actually addressing the person as a human being and not simply to pander to an audience.
Gameification is responsible for the behaviour you're calling "standard" and it is not only unhealthy but something that prevents us from having real conversations and treating one another like real human beings.
Actually engaging directly with the person you're responding to is healthy and something that should be promoted. Soapboxing and sending messages that aren't actually directed at the person you're responding to should be extremely discouraged. It is annoying as fuck getting a phone notification that is basically not a message that's even for me.
You're willingly taking part in a public online forum, don't demand it to work like your fantasy notion of human conversation. You think real life conversations don't have random comments, changes of topics or people addressing the group?
Your nostalgia about the good old days of internet forums is just wrong. Even without 'points' public online conversations were completely different from private ones.
At the very least don't be a hypocrite. The person had a very valid response about how maybe reading state propaganda is not the best source of objective information - how is that not a valid reply to your posting of said state propaganda? You decided it wasn't addressed toward you, got mad and started to soapbox yourself and rudely lecture them - how very 'normal human conversation' of you. I think you didn't like your wikipedia article being challenged and all this talk about real human conversations is just your internal justification of being mad about a hurt ego, cause you sure as shit don't practice what you preach.
Online is making people less connected, woaaah how novel, I'm going to use that fact to create real human connections by berating people about petty and asinine shit.
Posting a part of the constitution referring to democratic centralism with no value judgement one way or another is not "state propaganda".
IDK what you're talking about, but what I'm saying is you can't just take a states word for it when they say they're good. If someone is asking "how does the Chinese government operate," telling them what the Chinese government says about itself is useless
Quote the part of my comment where I made any comment one way or the other that made a value judgement. He needed to know the name of it to do actual research and he got the fucking name of it.
K if you're not gonna read what I'm saying I'm gonna stop talking to you. Bye
You weren't really responding to me. You have no idea what my opinion on this topic is, if that message was for me then you just assumed what my position was from absolutely nothing, no? I was perhaps a little grumpier than I could have been in my response, but this is something that really bothers me and immediately sets me off.
You weren't talking to her from the start.
O...k?
You were talking at her. That's why she's upset, and rightfully so.
deleted by creator
It’s quite literally not “useless” in any sense of that word, what a ridiculous assessment
Speaking as someone in another country, America has a pretty weird obsession with freedom of speech and guns.
Sure, it’s bourgeois speech and petty bourgeois gun ownership, but it’s still a weird commitment to it.
based and grill-pilled