Some folks think you just gotta love every country that calls itself communist, or voices opposition to the US, like a fun house mirror version of conservative nativism.
It’s a state formed as a result of an anti-colonial movement fighting for liberation against your empire. Your empire killed millions of its people, destroyed what they had, and currently maintains a genocidal blockade against it.
Despite all that, it manages to hang on, and, considering the harrassment and assault from your empire, it also manages to provide its people with much better living standards than what one would expect from many states that you do not complain about (and which are not targets of the same sort of blockades). Also, you just plain haven’t even brought up any wrongdoings that the DPRK has supposedly done.
Overall, I would say that that does make the DPRK fairly good as far as states go.
And obviously false memes like the OP don’t convince me that there is any sincerity in its defenders.
Either you are unfamiliar with the resolution in question and are assuming that the OP lied (without you double-checking), or you know that the OP didn’t lie and are trying to engage in spreading your genocidal empire’s false propaganda.
That’s not true, though. You won’t find any support for thr Shining Path of Peru or Pol Pot and thr Khmer Rouge here, for example, even though they called themselves communists and voiced opposition to the US. The fact is, the groups communists support are more nuanced than that simple binary, and trying to forcd that nuance into a binary just dodges any need to look into why communists actually support socialist states.
Yeah that’s cool. Which is part of why I don’t get why North Korea gets any fucking love. I mean, times are hard for everyone I’m sure but aesthetics aside they don’t seem any more “socialist” than the “national” socialists. Even in all the dubious circumstances where a communist country had a presidential effectively served for the length of his natural life, aside from a brief interlude by Raul Castro none that I can recall have shown dynastic tendencies.
The DPRK is socialist, public ownership is the principle aspect of its economy. It’s no utopia, but it’s far from the dystopian hellworld the western media makes it out to be. It’s entirely different from the Khmer Rouge and Shining Path. Additionally, socialist countries haven’t been “dynasties.”
Honestly this description is sorta spot on made me chuckle— I’m always on the fence whether it’s this or just nation states trying to sway popular opinion.
It’s neither. As I said to the other person, communists don’t support, say, the Shining Path of Peru, or Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge. Communists support socialist states, as well as anti-imperialist states, based on their actual real merits.
Some folks think you just gotta love every country that calls itself communist, or voices opposition to the US, like a fun house mirror version of conservative nativism.
What is it with people desperately trying to demonise the DPRK as if you you weren’t fed obvious lies since you were born?
I’m willing to accept that there’s been some exaggerations made about how bad the DPRK is.
That doesn’t mean I think it’s good.
And obviously false memes like the OP don’t convince me that there is any sincerity in its defenders.
It’s a state formed as a result of an anti-colonial movement fighting for liberation against your empire. Your empire killed millions of its people, destroyed what they had, and currently maintains a genocidal blockade against it.
Despite all that, it manages to hang on, and, considering the harrassment and assault from your empire, it also manages to provide its people with much better living standards than what one would expect from many states that you do not complain about (and which are not targets of the same sort of blockades). Also, you just plain haven’t even brought up any wrongdoings that the DPRK has supposedly done.
Overall, I would say that that does make the DPRK fairly good as far as states go.
Either you are unfamiliar with the resolution in question and are assuming that the OP lied (without you double-checking), or you know that the OP didn’t lie and are trying to engage in spreading your genocidal empire’s false propaganda.
That’s not true, though. You won’t find any support for thr Shining Path of Peru or Pol Pot and thr Khmer Rouge here, for example, even though they called themselves communists and voiced opposition to the US. The fact is, the groups communists support are more nuanced than that simple binary, and trying to forcd that nuance into a binary just dodges any need to look into why communists actually support socialist states.
Yeah that’s cool. Which is part of why I don’t get why North Korea gets any fucking love. I mean, times are hard for everyone I’m sure but aesthetics aside they don’t seem any more “socialist” than the “national” socialists. Even in all the dubious circumstances where a communist country had a presidential effectively served for the length of his natural life, aside from a brief interlude by Raul Castro none that I can recall have shown dynastic tendencies.
The DPRK is socialist, public ownership is the principle aspect of its economy. It’s no utopia, but it’s far from the dystopian hellworld the western media makes it out to be. It’s entirely different from the Khmer Rouge and Shining Path. Additionally, socialist countries haven’t been “dynasties.”
Honestly this description is sorta spot on made me chuckle— I’m always on the fence whether it’s this or just nation states trying to sway popular opinion.
It’s neither. As I said to the other person, communists don’t support, say, the Shining Path of Peru, or Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge. Communists support socialist states, as well as anti-imperialist states, based on their actual real merits.