For clarity, I share the belief with my fellow Marxists that all states are monopolies on violence wielded by the ruling class, and are thus “authoritarian,” regardless of which class is the ruling class. Worker states are also monopolies on violence, even if this is used to uplift the working class and prevent capitalists from regaining control. So, to answer your questions, yes I do support the PRC and DPRK, as the Black Panther Party did before me:
The DPRK is even more egregiously slandered. The story you are referencing is the idea that Kim Jong Un’s uncle was executed by 120 dogs, which was disproven as originating in a Chinese satirical column. There was an entirely different official alleged to have been executed by antiaircraft gun, which, shocker, was also retracted. People believe the wildest claims about the DPRK, yet so many allegations of wild executions are walked out that socialists joke about “juche necromancy.”
In any case, yes, both the PRC and DPRK are more comprehensively democratic than the US, and for more on that I recommend professor Roland Boer’s Socialism in Power: On the History and Theory of Socialist Governance. Both have unique forms of democratic decision making that more comprehensively involve the whole of society in guiding how the country is run.
As for the June 4th Incident, yes, of course I am, likely more than you given your frankly gullible acceptance of the most nonsense claims about northern Korea. A color revolution grew from what originated as protests against the marketization shifts under Deng Xiaoping that had turned into western-backed protests against CPC control, resulting in a few hundred deaths from clashes between rioters and the PLA around Beijing after the PLA had been sent in to disburse the protests. Once the PLA reached Tian’anmen Square, the center of the protests, the square was dispersed bloodlessly. The CIA-backed student leaders were evacuated in Operation Yellowbird. For more, I recommend this Tian’anmen Protests reading list.
I encourage you to be less willing to believe whatever the US Empire says about its geopolitical enemies.
Then I can only assume you terminate your own thought process frequently, considering both the Washington Times and Guardian debunked the stories on the DPRK you mixed up. If even western media is too tankie for you, how do you navigate life? I can only assume your willingness to believe anything and reject introspection comes from a deep chauvanism towards Koreans.
It’s clear that if you’re not even willing to get your propaganda stories straight when repeating lies already retracted by the sourced that shared them, you are actively choosing not to confront your own propagandizing.
Amazing comeback. I’m well aware that liberal institutions despise the DPRK, and that countries like the US regularly manufacture mass propaganda against it. You’re more than free to check the resources I’ve already linked.
I’m sorry, but I refuse to be so ignorant about a country that I mix up two publicly retracted propaganda stories into one, while telling the person that actually digs into these stories and researches the country that they are bad. It’s naked ignorance on your part mixed with chauvanism. I already said I have broadly the same positions as the Communist Party of Cuba and Black Panther Party on the DPRK, if that doesn’t cause you to reconsider your preconceived notions then I don’t know what will.
I never posted any essays, I posted a scholarly textbook from a professor in China. Calling academics “random nobodies” because they live in China, and textbooks “essays,” is about what I’d expect from someone that doesn’t even bother to fact-check before spreading racist lies about the DPRK. Further, though, what evidence do you want, specifically? For what claim? If you give a specific claim, I can counter with specific evidence. The most I’ve said is that you lied about executions using tabloid media as evidence, and that the DPRK isn’t a hellhole.
Ah, that? That’s not a source, it’s just someone talking about how we define tankies and what the group that gets called tankies supports. I was referring to Roland Boer’s work as the textbook, Nia Frome is a writer for Red Sails, not an academic. Sorry for the confusion. In any case, “Tankies” isn’t evidence of anything, it’s a persuasive argument. Socialism in Power is evidence on the DPRK’s democratic institutions.
For clarity, I share the belief with my fellow Marxists that all states are monopolies on violence wielded by the ruling class, and are thus “authoritarian,” regardless of which class is the ruling class. Worker states are also monopolies on violence, even if this is used to uplift the working class and prevent capitalists from regaining control. So, to answer your questions, yes I do support the PRC and DPRK, as the Black Panther Party did before me:
The importance I stressed on perception and allegations surrounding the definition of “tankie” is immediately relevant. The idea that the PRC regularly punishes people for what their relatives say abroad is highly exaggerated. Chinese legal code establishes that guilt is only established by the one committing a crime. Meanwhile, Hasan Piker is denied entry into the UK for supporting Palestine.
The DPRK is even more egregiously slandered. The story you are referencing is the idea that Kim Jong Un’s uncle was executed by 120 dogs, which was disproven as originating in a Chinese satirical column. There was an entirely different official alleged to have been executed by antiaircraft gun, which, shocker, was also retracted. People believe the wildest claims about the DPRK, yet so many allegations of wild executions are walked out that socialists joke about “juche necromancy.”
In any case, yes, both the PRC and DPRK are more comprehensively democratic than the US, and for more on that I recommend professor Roland Boer’s Socialism in Power: On the History and Theory of Socialist Governance. Both have unique forms of democratic decision making that more comprehensively involve the whole of society in guiding how the country is run.
As for the June 4th Incident, yes, of course I am, likely more than you given your frankly gullible acceptance of the most nonsense claims about northern Korea. A color revolution grew from what originated as protests against the marketization shifts under Deng Xiaoping that had turned into western-backed protests against CPC control, resulting in a few hundred deaths from clashes between rioters and the PLA around Beijing after the PLA had been sent in to disburse the protests. Once the PLA reached Tian’anmen Square, the center of the protests, the square was dispersed bloodlessly. The CIA-backed student leaders were evacuated in Operation Yellowbird. For more, I recommend this Tian’anmen Protests reading list.
I encourage you to be less willing to believe whatever the US Empire says about its geopolitical enemies.
Should have just lead with that. Pretty much a conversation ender right there.
Then I can only assume you terminate your own thought process frequently, considering both the Washington Times and Guardian debunked the stories on the DPRK you mixed up. If even western media is too tankie for you, how do you navigate life? I can only assume your willingness to believe anything and reject introspection comes from a deep chauvanism towards Koreans.
Yeah. You can take your “North Korea isn’t that bad” propaganda and take a hike.
It’s clear that if you’re not even willing to get your propaganda stories straight when repeating lies already retracted by the sourced that shared them, you are actively choosing not to confront your own propagandizing.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_in_North_Korea
Amazing comeback. I’m well aware that liberal institutions despise the DPRK, and that countries like the US regularly manufacture mass propaganda against it. You’re more than free to check the resources I’ve already linked.
What, the one essay defending tankies? No thank you, I have better things to do with my life, like putting my balls in a blender.
Seriously. Defending North Fucking Korea is bad. Saying they have a great government is even worse.
I’m sorry, but I refuse to be so ignorant about a country that I mix up two publicly retracted propaganda stories into one, while telling the person that actually digs into these stories and researches the country that they are bad. It’s naked ignorance on your part mixed with chauvanism. I already said I have broadly the same positions as the Communist Party of Cuba and Black Panther Party on the DPRK, if that doesn’t cause you to reconsider your preconceived notions then I don’t know what will.
You’re losing
I’m not out here defending the human rights violations of NORTH FUCKING KOREA.
If your defense for tankie talking points is “North Korea ain’t that bad TBH” then you fucking lost, and you fucking lost a long time ago.
If your evidence for “DPRK bad” is literally an invention of your own mind, then maybe you should reconsider your own position.
Feel free to post evidence to the contrary.
One essay by a random nobody does not count as evidence.
I never posted any essays, I posted a scholarly textbook from a professor in China. Calling academics “random nobodies” because they live in China, and textbooks “essays,” is about what I’d expect from someone that doesn’t even bother to fact-check before spreading racist lies about the DPRK. Further, though, what evidence do you want, specifically? For what claim? If you give a specific claim, I can counter with specific evidence. The most I’ve said is that you lied about executions using tabloid media as evidence, and that the DPRK isn’t a hellhole.
You’re telling me that you did not suggest that I read “Tankies” by Nia Frome?
Get fuckign real.
Ah, that? That’s not a source, it’s just someone talking about how we define tankies and what the group that gets called tankies supports. I was referring to Roland Boer’s work as the textbook, Nia Frome is a writer for Red Sails, not an academic. Sorry for the confusion. In any case, “Tankies” isn’t evidence of anything, it’s a persuasive argument. Socialism in Power is evidence on the DPRK’s democratic institutions.