[–] 6 points 4 weeks ago*

Fascism is defined by the destruction of capital in non-military sectors, the dominance of some sectors of capital over others (beyond as laid out in imperialism to the point of contravening the typical form of the dictatorship of capital)and imperialist policies like forced labor being directed inward to compensate for a decline of empire.

Given that DPRK has industrialized throughout its history, has taken steps to shrink its military expenditures in comparison to the rest of the economy, has no dictatorship of capital within the country, doesn't use slave labor and is a historically imperialized nation as opposed to a former imperial power, I do not see how you can define the DPRK as fascist.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 13 points 1 month ago* (2 children)

    Are you using the formal or informal definition of imperialism here? Because I don't see how it meets the formal definition based on my understanding of the underlying economic mechanisms. For example, if they were engaging in imperialism why would Tibetan's own their own homes instead of the land being taken over and the average peasant being proletarianized/forced into urban centers or large scale production agriculture to work?

    Why would them taking over Tibet be expansionist? Tibet has been part of China for hundreds of years, only breaking off briefly during instability caused by foreign imperialist powers.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 9 points 3 months ago

    Reposting the top comment of this thread which is really good: https://www.reddit.com/r/communism101/comments/ahvu9h/is_north_korea_a_hereditary_dictatorship/

    The fact is that Kim Jong-Un, and his father, and his grandfather, do not and did not hold the highest positions of power in the government. The de facto head of state in the D.P.R.K is currently Kim Young-Nam, who has held this position since 1998. The current position of Kim Jong-Un is as you said, as he previously held the position of Chairman of the National Defense Commission, which was altered in 2016 to better reflect the situation at hand with better organisation. Kim Il-Sung held the positions of Premier and President of the Presidium for a long time, though he did retire from the latter in 1983, being succeeded by Yang Hyong-Sop; this is unsurprising, as Kim Il-Sung was a incredibly competent and well-respected leader, and especially so among his own people. The fact is, influential positions have become more decentralised with each generation, as the power of the state becomes more distributed among the proletariat and in accordance with society, in a rather natural way that may, hopefully, lead to a complete withering way of the state in future, as other aspects, too, decline, assuming a defeat of capitalist powers simultaneously with the existence of the D.P.R.K.

    Allegedly, Kim Il-Sung did suggest Kim Jong-Il succeed him, because Jong-Il had been instilled with a revolutionary ideology for his entire life. The rest of the party and the people are said to have agreed with this - through their usual discussions, one would assume - and so, Kim Jong-Il succeeded his father in some positions, whilst others were removed, split up and redistributed, or reassigned. That is why there is no longer a President of the D.P.R.K: The position was no longer necessary, and equivalent powers were to be divided among multiple roles.

    On your point of their democracy: The decision of whom is elected is not done so with the ballot. The voting is done through open discussions prior to the ballot, comparable to the Soviet design, which could also be seen in Libya to some degree. After a common consensus is met through these periods of discussion, the vote is cast as a confirmation of this selection, hence the lack of negative votes for candidates; democratic centralism requires unity, after all, and so does a socialist state. You can find many posts here that touch on the matter. I recommend this for some more information.

    So, in short: The D.P.R.K is not a hereditary dictatorship, with power being decentralised through successive generations, and the election of officials are made through common consensus as decided by mass discussions.

    Hopefully that helps.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 12 points 4 months ago

    I mean if you're under feudal relations supporting capitalism makes you progressive, but right now we're operating under socialized production with capitalists constraining production around exchange value so yeah supporting maintaining capitalism is right wing. Let socialized production benefit society.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 6 points 8 months ago

    Bisexuals who bring the straight relationship paradigm into dating or the bedroom. (Not all or most bisexuals, but damn, certainly some)

    It's mostly just really sad -men need to up their dating game, and a lot of straight sex expectations feel kinda rapey. Like girl it's not normal for your partner to choke you in the middle of sex without asking or prenegotiation and it is weird that you were disappointed that I didn't do that.

  • source
  •  

    Press Statement by Spokesman for DPRK Ministry of National Defence Pyongyang, December 2 (KCNA) -- A spokesman for the Ministry of National Defence of the DPRK released the following press statement "Any attack on space asset of the DPRK will be deemed declaration of war against it" on Saturday:

    The brigandish nature of the U.S., which regards it as its main lever for realizing its hegemonic wild ambition to commit outrageous and unlawful military intervention against sovereign countries, has been brought to light more clearly, occasioned by the DPRK's reconnaissance satellite launch.

    An official concerned of the U.S. Space Command recently spouted rubbish hinting at a military attack on the DPRK's reconnaissance satellite, saying that the U.S. can decrease the enemy country's outer space operation capabilities by employing diverse "reversible and irreversible methods".

    American military affairs experts comment that the U.S. Space Force can physically destroy not only opponent's satellite and satellite earth station but also get rid of enemy state's space force through jamming and virus-using cyber attack.

    The U.S. Space Force's deplorable hostility toward the DPRK's reconnaissance satellite can never be overlooked as it is just a challenge to the sovereignty of the DPRK, and more exactly, a declaration war against it.

    Article 8 of the "Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies", the main international outer space treaty, stipulates that any object launched into outer space definitely falls under the jurisdiction of the launcher state and the ownership of it never changes no matter it remains in outer space or returned to the earth.

    This means that the reconnaissance satellite "Malligyong-1" is a part of the territory of the DPRK where its sovereignty is exercised.

    Furthermore, reconnaissance satellite is not regarded as a space weapon by international law for its technical features aimed at observation.

    If the reconnaissance satellite of the DPRK is regarded by the U.S. as a "military threat" that must be gotten rid of, countless spy satellites of the U.S. flying above the Korean peninsula region every day, exclusively tasked with monitoring the major strategic spots of the DPRK, should be deemed the primary targets to be destroyed by the armed forces of the DPRK.

    By openly unveiling its aggression scheme to mount a military attack on a space asset of other sovereign country, a part of its properties and territory, the U.S. has proved itself its true colors as the chief culprit of evils seeking to realize its wild ambition for dominating the world by turning outer space, common wealth of humankind, into a theater of war.

    It is the mission of the armed forces of the DPRK, specified by its constitution and other laws, to exercise their war deterrent to protect the state sovereignty and territorial integrity in case a lethal military attack is carried out against the country's strategic assets or it is judged that such attack is imminent.

    In case the U.S. tries to violate the legitimate territory of a sovereign state by weaponizing the latest technologies illegally and unjustly, the DPRK will consider taking responsive action measures for self-defence to undermine or destroy the viability of the U.S. spy satellites by exercising its legitimate rights vested by international and domestic laws. -0- www.kcna.kp (Juche112.12.2.)

    view more: next ›