I feel your pain comrade. Reading the history of the Korean war was an experience I found deeply upsetting in the sheer scale of violence subjected to those people in what was a blatantly racist war and what most of the people (outside US) considered a blatantly racist war - even in 1950
Then the US and it's puppet state practice invading DPRK every year through "military exercises" whilst blockading their ports. The same bastards that lived warm and carefree whilst collaborating with the Japanese then the Americans while Kim Il Sung was fighting Japanese then American imperialism in -40c winters in conditions as close to hell on Earth as you can get.
There is a lot of cognitive dissonance in imperialist nations though. They assume that DPRK government is illegitimate purely because they are poor...Yet somehow their government is legitimate despite committing mass murder every year all around the world since 1945.
There is a every reason to be positive for future of DPRK though. They've secured themselves under the most incredible US Aggression and now have ICBMs. A trade route will be opened up to China soon as DPRK bargains with its ICBMs and China itself is strengthened against US imperialism.
We will see DPRK be a prosperous place in the future as they partake in the Asian economic boom - particularly with the signing of the RCEP
Reading the history of the Korean war
What books would you recommend?
HI Comrade and @LENINSGHOSTFACEKILLA,
I would recommend reading what the DPRK has published however I will also put bourgeois historians as enough time has passed for bourgeois historians to be truthful about what the US and its puppet state did (Bourgeois historians seem to be able to tell the truth 70 years after an incident - when practically everyone who believed the imperialist lie is already dead)
For the most part I don't rate any Western bourgeois historians on the Korean war. Their books are entrenched under the lens of Western imperialism and bourgeois world view while calling the claims of biological warfare which are now confirmed as "communist propaganda"
Western Bourgeois sources
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-us-war-crime-north-korea-wont-forget/2015/03/20/fb525694-ce80-11e4-8c54-ffb5ba6f2f69_story.html
Bruce Cummings - Korean War (this book is important. IT shows that the South Koreans committed massacres 6 X the rate of North Koreans and the North Koreans were more selective in their reprisals. It also shows how the US filmed South Koreans committing massacres and atrocities then took the footage back home and told the world these were north koreans)
Western Independent Media sources
This article confirms what the North had said all along - that the US used biological warfare against them
https://medium.com/insurge-intelligence/the-long-suppressed-korean-war-report-on-u-s-use-of-biological-weapons-released-at-last-20d83f5cee54
DPRK sources
The US Imperialists Started The Korean War
http://www.korean-books.com.kp/KBMbooks/en/book/politics/4025.pdf
The Korean War - An Unanswered Question
http://www.korean-books.com.kp/KBMbooks/en/book/politics/4020.pdf
KOREA-THE 38TH PARALLEL NORTH
https://archive.org/details/Korea-38th
Japans War Crimes - Past and Present (to understand how US took over Japans role in Korea after ww2)
http://www.korean-books.com.kp/KBMbooks/en/book/politics/4021.pdf
what most of the people (outside US) considered a blatantly racist war - even in 1950
Ran across this the other day. It might be useful for reaching some people.
unfalsifiable idealistic demand they have of “how socialism should be”
ctrl+F: "Means of Production" NOT FOUND
What do you mean not found? It's literally in their constitution :
Article 19. The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea relies on socialist relations of production and on the foundation of an independent national economy.
Article 20. In the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea the means of production are owned by the State and social, cooperative organizations.
Article 21. The property of the State belongs to all the people. There is no limit to the property which the State can own. All natural resources, railways, air transport service, post and telecommunications establishments, as well as major factories and enterprises, ports and banks of the country are owned solely by the State. The State shall protect and develop on a preferential basis State property which plays the leading role in the economic development of the country.
Article 22. The property of social, cooperative organizations is collectively owned by the working people involved in the organizations concerned. Land, farm machinery and ships, as well as small and medium-sized factories and enterprises may be owned by social, cooperative organizations. The State shall protect the property of social, cooperative organizations.
Korea’s Means of Production are held socially. What is your point?
The survival of small states like Cuba, North Korea, and Vietnam in the face for the most powerful empire in history really is an incredible accomplishment, it hints at the untapped potential of socialist organization
You need a state to fight a state, which remains a bitter pill to swollow.
The only thing that can stop a bad guy with a state is a good guy with a state
Turns out if you want durable reforms like universal healthcare in an era where capitalism no longer has the capacity to support durable reforms and the ruling class worldwide is pushing austerity indefinitely, it’s helpful to have some sort of strategy to get rid of capitalism beyond fighting for reforms in isolation.
but yeah, still critical support (far less critical than many others too) for dprk. they've been through some shit.
The states not going anywhere until global capitalism and imperialism does. It’s role has not yet been fulfilled. Stop getting ahead of yourself and sabotaging our project, utopian
In other words, under capitalism we have the state in the proper sense of the word, that is, a special machine for the suppression of one class by another, and, what is more, of the majority by the minority. Naturally, to be successful, such an undertaking as the systematic suppression of the exploited majority by the exploiting minority calls for the utmost ferocity and savagery in the matter of suppressing, it calls for seas of blood, through which mankind is actually wading its way in slavery, serfdom and wage labor.
Furthermore, during the transition from capitalism to communism suppression is still necessary, but it is now the suppression of the exploiting minority by the exploited majority. A special apparatus, a special machine for suppression, the “state”, is still necessary, but this is now a transitional state. It is no longer a state in the proper sense of the word; for the suppression of the minority of exploiters by the majority of the wage slaves of yesterday is comparatively so easy, simple and natural a task that it will entail far less bloodshed than the suppression of the risings of slaves, serfs or wage-laborers, and it will cost mankind far less. And it is compatible with the extension of democracy to such an overwhelming majority of the population that the need for a special machine of suppression will begin to disappear. Naturally, the exploiters are unable to suppress the people without a highly complex machine for performing this task, but the people can suppress the exploiters even with a very simple “machine”, almost without a “machine”, without a special apparatus, by the simple organization of the armed people (such as the Soviets of Workers' and Soldiers' Deputies, we would remark, running ahead).
Lastly, only communism makes the state absolutely unnecessary, for there is nobody to be suppressed--“nobody” in the sense of a class, of a systematic struggle against a definite section of the population. We are not utopians, and do not in the least deny the possibility and inevitability of excesses on the part of individual persons, or the need to stop such excesses. In the first place, however, no special machine, no special apparatus of suppression, is needed for this: this will be done by the armed people themselves, as simply and as readily as any crowd of civilized people, even in modern society, interferes to put a stop to a scuffle or to prevent a woman from being assaulted. And, secondly, we know that the fundamental social cause of excesses, which consist in the violation of the rules of social intercourse, is the exploitation of the people, their want and their poverty. With the removal of this chief cause, excesses will inevitably begin to "wither away". We do not know how quickly and in what succession, but we do know they will wither away. With their withering away the state will also wither away.
jesus christ let's not please. i'm tried of the constant infighting.
The anarchists could just become Marxists already and we could stop fighting
Edit: Marxists are never going to become anarchists en masse in the same way athiests are never going to become Eastern Orthodox en masse. Anarchism and Marxism are incompatible, one calling for the immediate dissolution of the state and the other calling for a dictatorship of the proletariat. Anarchism has never won anything.
How do you all see this playing out? There is no other viable outcome except for the anarchists to all wise up and get on board the real global movement. In every other outcome, the former anarchists lose. There is only one path for an anarchist to communism, and it’s through Marxism. So grow up and get with the program and 90% of the global left.
there's a difference between marxists and ml/m. a lot of anarchism overlaps with a lot of marxism. less so with ml/m.
You mean anarchists have coopted certain non-threatening bits of Marx after getting owned by Marxism so hard they became (even more) irrelevant.
Anarchism is an idealist philosophy. Marxism is a materialist philosophy. There is no philosophical alignment except by happenstance, and all that anarcho-Marxists are doing is butchering and creating an incoherent abomination.
https://i.imgur.com/qd1sWUA.jpg
mate you need to chill a little. calling everyone who's not an ml/mlm a "counter-revolutionary" is really annoying. it's not like your ideologies brought communism either for fucks sake.
"X hate this" "X hate him" is a meme, I'm quite literally 100% shitposting.
uncritical support for the DPRK in its heroic struggle to liberate occupied Korea from the genocidal American empire
The US imperialists are our sworn enemy
Let's sweep them away, let's annihilate them, let's kill them
Comrades, always be watchful
In front of our eyes are the US imperialists
The bloodthirsty wolf, the US imperialist aggressor
is out of their mind, always talking about war
The US imperialists are our sworn enemy
Generation after generation, the enemy cut deep into our hearts
Our blood is boiling with hatred and anger
Let's sweep them away, let's annihilate them, let's kill them
Comrades, always be watchful
In front of our eyes are the US imperialists
By occupying our southern territory
They are infringing on my socialist homeland
The US imperialists are our sworn enemy
Generation after generation, the enemy cut deep into our hearts
Our blood is boiling with hatred and anger
Let's sweep them away, let's annihilate them, let's kill them
Comrades, always be watchful
In front of our eyes are the US imperialists
They are going into the grave of doom
They try hard to take all steps they can, but in vain
The US imperialists are our sworn enemy
Generation after generation, the enemy cut deep into our hearts
Our blood is boiling with hatred and anger
Let's sweep them away, let's annihilate them, let's kill them
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bg2VSMxQssA
:amerikkka: :cia: :shocked_porky: 🇰🇵 🇰🇵 🇰🇵 🇰🇵 :kalish: :hammer-sickle: :kim: 🇰🇵 🇰🇵 🇰🇵 🇰🇵
burning faso
The burning fiasco that was Burkina Faso (post-Sankara).
No this is standard Marxism
In reality, however, the state is nothing but a machine for the oppression of one class by another, and indeed in the democratic republic no less than in the monarchy; and at best an evil inherited by the proletariat after its victorious struggle for class supremacy, whose worst sides the proletariat, just like the Commune, cannot avoid having to lop off at the earliest possible moment, until such time as a new generation, reared in new and free social conditions, will be able to throw the entire lumber of the state on the scrap-heap.
Of late, the Social-Democratic philistine has once more been filled with wholesome terror at the words: Dictatorship of the Proletariat. Well and good, gentlemen, do you want to know what this dictatorship looks like? Look at the Paris Commune. That was the Dictatorship of the Proletariat.
The people’s state has been flung in our teeth ad nauseam by the anarchists, although Marx’s anti-Proudhon piece and after it the Communist Manifesto declare outright that, with the introduction of the socialist order of society, the state will dissolve of itself and disappear. Now, since the state is merely a transitional institution of which use is made in the struggle, in the revolution, to keep down one’s enemies by force, it is utter nonsense to speak of a free people’s state; so long as the proletariat still makes use of the state, it makes use of it, not for the purpose of freedom, but of keeping down its enemies and, as soon as there can be any question of freedom, the state as such ceases to exist.
Engels to August Bebel In Zwickau, London, March 18-28, 1875;
Nevertheless, the different states of the different civilized countries, in spite or their motley diversity of form, all have this in common: that they are based on modern bourgeois society, only one more or less capitalistically developed. They have, therefore, also certain essential characteristics in common. In this sense, it is possible to speak of the "present-day state" in contrast with the future, in which its present root, bourgeois society, will have died off.
The question then arises: What transformation will the state undergo in communist society? In other words, what social functions will remain in existence there that are analogous to present state functions? This question can only be answered scientifically, and one does not get a flea-hop nearer to the problem by a thousand-fold combination of the word 'people' with the word 'state'.
Between capitalist and communist society there lies the period of the revolutionary transformation of the one into the other. Corresponding to this is also a political transition period in which the state can be nothing but the revolutionary dictatorship of the proletariat.
Very true. Random storytime, back in high school in non-Western cultures, the teacher asked "how many of the Koreans in here would want a reunited Korea?" I was the only one who raised my hand.
