There’s been A GUY - with an emphasis on the A - in charge of North Korea since it existed. Show me where Marx wrote “and the guy who leads part of a successful-ish military campaign shall rule in absolute power and his office will be inherited by his forst-born son.” That sounds like a monarchy.
You should study North Korean politics and political structures.
The standard you are using, which is that there should be constant changes in leadership, is an attempt to use your existing liberal democracy as the only possible model for liberatory politics.
Think about it. Is the ONLY way you would ever accept a political system when it has constant leadership churn? Ok, grant that. Then ask, what causes constant leadership churn?
The answers will be either constant fighting between major ideologically opposed factions OR constant disapproval by the people being governed.
Neither of those conditions are good healthy conditions.
Now instead imagine if there were no competing ideologies, the capitalists have been purged and domestically the entire population has a shares collective trauma from the massive bombing campaign by the psychopathic US.
What’s the behavior gonna be? Well, if any leader is capable of leading them out of the caves and to safety from napalm, kidnapping, fire bombing, and famine - that leader is either very lucky and when their luck runs out they will be ousted, or that leader is actually very effective, responsive to the needs of the people, and is capable of adapting to changing times. In that case, the people will have absolutely no desire to put another leader in place.
When that happens, especially in a culture that puts huge importance on multi-generational families, the children of that leader are likely going to be the best equipped to carry in the program. Not necessarily though. They would have to remain constantly engaged, constantly proving that they are capable.
What would that require? It would require a system where by existing leadership cabinets were capable of selecting and assigning those descendants to specific posts. And guess what… That’s exactly what DPRK has.
Your insistence that freedom is defined exclusively by multi-party systems that give “equal” voice to capitalist and working class interests is a form of chauvinism.
You can always make a Lemmy.ml account if you want! I have 3 accounts, 1 on .ml, 1 on Hexbear, and 1 on grad (pretty new though). Easier to compartmentalize.
Re-commenting what @freagle@lemmygrad.ml commented so you can see it since .world seems to love censoring non-liberal instances
You should study North Korean politics and political structures.
The standard you are using, which is that there should be constant changes in leadership, is an attempt to use your existing liberal democracy as the only possible model for liberatory politics.
Think about it. Is the ONLY way you would ever accept a political system when it has constant leadership churn? Ok, grant that. Then ask, what causes constant leadership churn?
The answers will be either constant fighting between major ideologically opposed factions OR constant disapproval by the people being governed.
Neither of those conditions are good healthy conditions.
Now instead imagine if there were no competing ideologies, the capitalists have been purged and domestically the entire population has a shares collective trauma from the massive bombing campaign by the psychopathic US.
What’s the behavior gonna be? Well, if any leader is capable of leading them out of the caves and to safety from napalm, kidnapping, fire bombing, and famine - that leader is either very lucky and when their luck runs out they will be ousted, or that leader is actually very effective, responsive to the needs of the people, and is capable of adapting to changing times. In that case, the people will have absolutely no desire to put another leader in place.
When that happens, especially in a culture that puts huge importance on multi-generational families, the children of that leader are likely going to be the best equipped to carry in the program. Not necessarily though. They would have to remain constantly engaged, constantly proving that they are capable.
What would that require? It would require a system where by existing leadership cabinets were capable of selecting and assigning those descendants to specific posts. And guess what… That’s exactly what DPRK has.
Your insistence that freedom is defined exclusively by multi-party systems that give “equal” voice to capitalist and working class interests is a form of chauvinism.
If their ideology says that innocent people deserve to starve and sleep in the street because money then yes actually their absence from a society would be an extremely obviously good thing
“Capitalist” is a class, not an ideology, you’re mixing it up with liberalism. Secondly, yes, just like we should suppress fascism, monarchism, etc, a socialist society should also suppress liberalism.
There’s been A GUY - with an emphasis on the A - in charge of North Korea since it existed. Show me where Marx wrote “and the guy who leads part of a successful-ish military campaign shall rule in absolute power and his office will be inherited by his forst-born son.” That sounds like a monarchy.
You should study North Korean politics and political structures.
The standard you are using, which is that there should be constant changes in leadership, is an attempt to use your existing liberal democracy as the only possible model for liberatory politics.
Think about it. Is the ONLY way you would ever accept a political system when it has constant leadership churn? Ok, grant that. Then ask, what causes constant leadership churn?
The answers will be either constant fighting between major ideologically opposed factions OR constant disapproval by the people being governed.
Neither of those conditions are good healthy conditions.
Now instead imagine if there were no competing ideologies, the capitalists have been purged and domestically the entire population has a shares collective trauma from the massive bombing campaign by the psychopathic US.
What’s the behavior gonna be? Well, if any leader is capable of leading them out of the caves and to safety from napalm, kidnapping, fire bombing, and famine - that leader is either very lucky and when their luck runs out they will be ousted, or that leader is actually very effective, responsive to the needs of the people, and is capable of adapting to changing times. In that case, the people will have absolutely no desire to put another leader in place.
When that happens, especially in a culture that puts huge importance on multi-generational families, the children of that leader are likely going to be the best equipped to carry in the program. Not necessarily though. They would have to remain constantly engaged, constantly proving that they are capable.
What would that require? It would require a system where by existing leadership cabinets were capable of selecting and assigning those descendants to specific posts. And guess what… That’s exactly what DPRK has.
Your insistence that freedom is defined exclusively by multi-party systems that give “equal” voice to capitalist and working class interests is a form of chauvinism.
Sadly, .worlders can’t see grad comments.
They don’t know what they’re missing
Grrrr
I got u fam lol
You can always make a Lemmy.ml account if you want! I have 3 accounts, 1 on .ml, 1 on Hexbear, and 1 on grad (pretty new though). Easier to compartmentalize.
Re-commenting what @freagle@lemmygrad.ml commented so you can see it since .world seems to love censoring non-liberal instances
Thanks for reposting. The commenter appears to be a member of the semi-conscious liberation army.
Ah yes, purging opposing political ideologies. What a healthy society that must be
If their ideology says that innocent people deserve to starve and sleep in the street because money then yes actually their absence from a society would be an extremely obviously good thing
“Capitalist” is a class, not an ideology, you’re mixing it up with liberalism. Secondly, yes, just like we should suppress fascism, monarchism, etc, a socialist society should also suppress liberalism.
yes, n*zis should get capped bc of their political ideologies. you should try taking the boot out of your mouth before speaking.
Removed by mod
Lol