Can someone tell me what my tendency is?

[Average Joe]

Hello I am new here. I'd like to know what my tendency is since I know what my views are but I don't know what tendency these views make me have. Am I a Marxist-Leninist or something else?

First of all I don't believe in democracy. I believe it leads to corruption and I think it's overrated! So in my ideal nation there would be an Authoritarian government.

I believe in centralization, I believe there should be no private property and everything should be owned by a government rather than select people (like in Capitalism).

I consider myself a Socialist, but not a Communist because I do believe there needs to be an all-powerful but benevolent government.

I believe in socialism in one country and civic nationalism. I believe in a powerful armed forces but for defense purposes only. I believe in isolationism. I believe in a nation having self-reliance and and a powerful military to defend itself from Imperialistic nations.

I believe there should be no unemployment, everyone should be able to work and everyone should have equal pay. I believe the Capitalists and Fascists should be imprisoned - that is I don't believe in political freedoms as this would be harmful to the nation's stability. One party and one party only!

I believe racial and ethnic discrimination should be outlawed, we are all one!

Lastly I believe religion should be outlawed. I think it's okay for the populace to believe in something higher but lets leave it at that. We cannot afford religion, everyone would believe different things and maybe they would harm people because they think that's what their religion means. It's better for all if we just outlaw it altogether.

So, what is my political tendency? Thank you!

I hope I did not offend anyone, I have to be honest so you can know what my tendency is.

[Q]

You could try finding political education by playing Red Alert, which seems right up your alley. It has little to do with communism/socialism though. Marx called this form "barracks communism (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barracks_communism)" and had a great disdain for it.

[Slavic]

You could try finding political education by playing Red Alert, which seems right up your alley. It has little to do with communism/socialism though. Marx called this form "barracks communism (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barracks_communism)" and had a great disdain for it.

Red Alert tendency. Awesome game, and fairly accurate portrayal of OP.

[RedWorker]

State capitalist Stalinist. Nothing to do with socialism at all.


Marx called this form "barracks communism (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barracks_communism)" and had a great disdain for it.

Can you link me to some writings of Marx about it?

[Zoroaster]

But dat trolling tho

[ℂᵒиѕẗяᵤкт]

To Average Joe,

I apologize on behalf of the administration for being so dismissive of you, even though I agree your politics seem a little sophomoric and naive.

You don't really seem to have an actual tendency, though. Some of the things you said make me feel as though your views are based on abstractions made by anti-communist propaganda about "authoritarianism" and such.

Even so, I don't doubt your genuine interest in communism. You've just got what some people might call "First Day Communist Syndrome," which presents as more of an historical interest in the Soviet military or a fetishistic preoccupation with Soviet aesthetic.

If you want some suggested reading, I can list some material in an attempt to be more helpful than the people suggesting you play a stupid video game:

Foundations of Leninism is a good bit of introductory material by the Big S himself. Lenin's biography of Marx is excellent, and Imperialism is the most important work that distinguishes Leninism as "Marxism in the Age of Imperialism."

But, if you really need to just cut your teeth, you can't beat the Manifesto, my friend. It's actually pretty short. I'd also suggests Mao's pamphlet "Where do right ideas come from?" as an introduction to the "mass line" approach of building theory. More works that go in-depth into the historical precedents of communism are Marx's Critique of the Gotha Programme, which is great for getting a handle on the dictatorship of the proletariat (which is both authoritarian, in some sense, as well as democratic!) and Engels's Socialism: Utopian and Scientific.

Marx's Capital is still the cornerstone of Marxian analysis of capitalism, but it is a huge and very dense read. I'd wait until you feel comfortable with Marxism in broad strokes before attempting the long-term project of studying it. Even then, don't tackle it all at once.

[Q]

But dat trolling tho
Exactly what I'm suspecting. Keeping an eye out for mister Joe.

[ℂᵒиѕẗяᵤкт]

State capitalist Stalinist. Nothing to do with socialism at all.

It's a good thing I didn't go through with my plans for a RedWorker drinking game. I'd be dead.

[Average Joe]

But dat trolling tho

I am not trolling. I don't think real Socialism can work. It's impossible to me. There needs to be a government. I believe Stalin had it right.

[Average Joe]

You could try finding political education by playing Red Alert, which seems right up your alley. It has little to do with communism/socialism though. Marx called this form "barracks communism" and had a great disdain for it.

Apparently Maoist China was considered 'barracks communism'.

[Rafiq]

I am not trolling. I don't think real Socialism can work. It's impossible to me. There needs to be a government. I believe Stalin had it right.

The probable necessity of a strong centralized government in a hypothetical future society is likely and necessary only as a transnational force - which is why I find your position concerning, as it's logical conclusion is apparently "civic nationalism".

Nationalism is reactionary in ESSENCE, even the forces of global capital have begun to trample upon the "sovereignty of the nation". To oppose this is to identify with Marine Le Penn, Ron Paul and Farage, no questions. The final and highest expression of the development of the nation, the highest manifestation of all the national histories of all people's is Internationalism - no, transnationalism. The history of nations has been shaped by class struggle.

Communism isn't about the "absence of government". It is a movement of the commons - without the pre requisite of the historical capitalist totality it is impossible, just as real freedom cannot exist without the pre-emergence of formal freedom. Not that the conclusion is that we must consciously emulate capitalism - but that capitalism is Here, and has been here, and that from it Communism has risen.

Its true that a fight for decentralized (therefore isolated) autonomous communities would be quite the step back as far as the achievements of history go - despite what they claim these communities will be like, the mentality is completely petty bourgeois. A universal social, and political standard must exist, before and after the struggle.

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

prickism?

[Sand Castle]

Sounds like Juche. Not all of it, but some.

[Црвена]

Sounds like Ingsoc.

[GanzEgal]

what is my political tendency?
The closest hit must be Juche, North Korean style. Just without the equal pay. North Korea has a privileged elite, generally anyone who has the legal right to enter the relatively developed and comfortable Pyongyang can consider himself privileged, as majority of the population don't have the legal right to enter this city.

Maybe you are a pure Jucheist, and the reality in North Korea just misses their own ideals. Which is quite predictable when you create a dictatorial power structure.

No, I don't like this political tendency.

[Tim Cornelis]

This is what is called a Tankie. Someone who takes the concept of Stalinism and strips it of all Marxist pretence by extension of being ignorant of Marxism. So where normally Stalinists deny and reject authoritarianism in the sense that they believe the USSR to have been democratic, these Tankies embrace what Stalinists denounce as bourgeois propaganda. Of course, this ideology is not socialist at all. It presupposes the separation of labour from the objective conditions of their labour, and therefore class society and class rule. Historical experience also shows these types of government are not sustainable, so why anyone would want to emulate them today -- apart from being a rebellious teenager -- is not exactly clear to me.

That 'What-ya-me-call-it' says about this is also quite revealing: "You've just got what some people might call "First Day Communist Syndrome," which presents as more of an historical interest in the Soviet military or a fetishistic preoccupation with Soviet aesthetic."
Ordinarily, 'first day communist syndrome' would be an instinctive dislike for right-wing politics, for victim blaming, poverty, and therefore developing an interest in anarchist and Marxist political theory. On the other hand, if 'first day [Stalinist] syndrome' is 'an historical interest in the Soviet military or a fetishistic preoccupation with Soviet aesthetic' then it follows logically that they adopt the USSR as ideological point of reference and then reverse engineer back to Marx (rather than use Marxism as starting point), rationalising the Soviet system, and selectively reading and quoting Marx and Marxist texts to somehow make the Soviet experience compatible with Marxism. This is crucial in understanding why Stalinists even exist.

If, in contrast, you start with Marx, Engels, and Marxism as point of reference and then apply yourself to the Soviet experience it's impossible to make the two compatible.

[boyhominid]

I believe in socialism in one country...
Trademark Stalinism



I believe in isolationism. I believe in a nation having self-reliance and and a powerful military to defend itself from Imperialistic nations.
Juche/Songun

[Average Joe]

prickism?

That's very disrespectful. I do not believe real Communism is possible, I think there needs to be a government. I am inspired by Stalinist USSR and eastern bloc countries and modern-day DPRK. Yes, I support the Democratic People's Republic of Korea. You might want to watch some of Jason Unruhe's videos about North Korea. I choose not to believe Capitalistic propaganda.

[Average Joe]

Sounds like Juche. Not all of it, but some.

That's interesting because the DPRK is my favorite country!

[ℂᵒиѕẗяᵤкт]

This is a most unwelcome turn of events...

[Q]

You might want to watch some of Jason Unruhe's videos about North Korea. I choose not to believe Capitalistic propaganda.
That explains a lot. Unruhe is hardly taken serious by anyone on this website.

[ℂᵒиѕẗяᵤкт]

I'm with Q on this Unruhe character.

The fellow professes a certain tendency, but the kid doesn't actually apply any genuine methodology to world problems. What Tim called a tankie I might call a "back of the book communist," someone who skips to the back of the textbook to copy half the right answers and never learns the method by which those answers were reached. (This is just as much a problem for any tendency as it is for "Stalinists.")

He's also an accomplished homophobe and sexist, and I wouldn't be surprised if he's made some questionable statements about race, too.

[Magón]

That's interesting because the DPRK is my favorite country!

Hilarious.

Might I direct you to Tim Cornelius' recent posts in the Problems with Tendency thread. It's all about Juche and thus, the DPRK.

[ℂᵒиѕẗяᵤкт]

To Magon,

Tim hasn't actually said anything substantive about the subject.

I appreciated your demonstration of good faith in the thread, but I find your support of a fellow who just keeps repeating vague assertions, occasionally citing overt propaganda and sprinkling in a racial slur here and there in his campaign of PM's to me, utterly disturbing.

[Magón]

To Magon,

Tim hasn't actually said anything substantive about the subject.

I appreciated your demonstration of good faith in the thread, but I find your support of a fellow who just keeps repeating vague assertions, occasionally citing overt propaganda and sprinkling in a racial slur here and there in his campaign of PM's to me, utterly disturbing.

Well you can call it propaganda, but I have to say, on the other side, the propaganda that the DPRK tries spreading is pretty fucking idiotic. And as Rafiq plainly stated in the same thread, the DPRK is reactionary as a given. So.... yeah.

[Tim Cornelis]

Your favourite country is a bizarre absolutist hereditary ethnic nationalist despotic state that regulates your clothes and hair, subjects women to forced abortions, has its economy in shambles, is in a perpetual state of food insecurity, is subjected to bizarre media rants and over the top jingoist and chauvinistic rhetoric, incarcerates entire families in concentration camps based on inhumane intensive labour, uses individuals for experiments with poison gas?

May I kindly suggest that you move there and try it out yourself? Recently a US citizen tried to do that, I'm sure you'll receive the same welcome.

Oh, but that's all elaborate propaganda of course, which you don't believe. But, honestly I don't think you believe that yourself. You presumably like saying that to rustle people's jimmies.

[RedWorker]

Your favourite country is a bizarre absolutist hereditary ethnic nationalist despotic state that regulates your clothes and hair

Since this is clearly just "Western propaganda", I'd like to see ℂᵒиѕẗяᵤкт provide us with a picture of a North Korean male with long hair or of any individual with a non-status quo hair or clothing style. Really, try it. Just one. And if you can't - what does that say?

Anything the tankie says should just be ignored until he shows us the picture.

[ℂᵒиѕẗяᵤкт]

To Magon,

Well, no, it isn't "a given," and especially not because someone just says so. And I'm not sure how the credibility of north Korean propaganda affects the credibility of Western propaganda in the least.


To RedWorker,

So if I can show you a picture of a north Korean guy with long hair, that'll make north Korea not reactionary?

As for clothes, you realize t-shirts, jeans, et al. are pretty common over there, right? Or are you looking for a leather jacket with anarchist patches?

[RedWorker]

So if I can show you a picture of a north Korean guy with long hair, that'll make north Korea not reactionary?

You won't find it, and this fact proves that something is fucked up over there. Just do it, I challenge you.

[Magón]

To Magon,

Well, no, it isn't "a given," and especially not because someone just says so. And I'm not sure how the credibility of north Korean propaganda affects the credibility of Western propaganda in the least.

Because North Korean propaganda is fucking idiotic, I already said this. Doesn't matter if you put it up against Western propaganda or not, DPRK propaganda by itself, is fucking idiotic. You might not think so, because you're about Juche, but to anyone without some DPRK-grade blinders on, their propaganda and whole existence, is shit. It's as Rafiq said, a given.

I've never seen anything on the DPRK that was worth saying, "Hey, these guys are just a bunch of misunderstood people." No, they're quite crazy and worthless. The DPRK brings nothing to actual class struggle, or anything remotely socialist/communist.

[ℂᵒиѕẗяᵤкт]

To RedWorker,

Once again, you've dodged a question. Will seeing such a picture mean, to you, that north Korea is not reactionary?

The fact that you can't answer simple questions means all you've really got is emotionally charged rhetoric you're hoping to trap me with.


To Magon,

Okay, you still haven't answered how north Korean propaganda demonstrates the credibility of Western propaganda.

Again, all you've done is reiterate your assertion sans anything substantial. And that's characterizing the responses I'm getting from the red-in-the-face anti-Juche kids on this site.

So stamp your foot and say it again.

[RedWorker]

Seeing such a picture would be surprising to me. You can't expect me to change an analysis based on one picture, but it will give at least a little credibility to your words. If you can't even find such a picture (which would be a basic thing which indicates a remotely healthy society, and does not mean the country is actually good), then that says a lot.

[ℂᵒиѕẗяᵤкт]

To RedWorker,

I concede to you that, because I can't find a photograph of a north Korean male with long hair on the internet, that the D.P.R.K. is a reactionary far-right state. You win.

[RedWorker]

I agree, you cannot find even such a basic thing and the conclusion is this: you have lost all credibility and North Korea is a completely fucked up society.

[Magón]

To Magon,

Okay, you still haven't answered how north Korean propaganda demonstrates the credibility of Western propaganda.

Again, all you've done is reiterate your assertion sans anything substantial. And that's characterizing the responses I'm getting from the red-in-the-face anti-Juche kids on this site.

So stamp your foot and say it again.

Like I said, you don't need to put it up against Western propaganda. So forget about the West and all it has to say about the DPRK. The DPRK, in all it's propaganda, has shown itself to be fucking worthless and reactionary.

And on top of that, to me, any leaders of a country are fucking worthless, because in this world when I hear someone say they're leading a nation, it means that those leaders are suppressing and beating down more often than not, people I agree with, or could, which makes every nation in the world, DPRK included, fucking worthless to me.

[ℂᵒиѕẗяᵤкт]

To Magon,

So because they have stupid propaganda, they're worthless.

I appreciate you giving me a better idea of your approach to materialist analysis.

P.S. - I think we got off track, because what I was asking was how does Korean propaganda demonstrate the credibility of Western propaganda? I asked because an earlier statement seemed to suggest some kind of inverse proportionality of credibility.


To RedWorker,

Yup. Because Google returned no results for the search parameter you set for me, I have lost all credibility. You really put me in my place, dude. The proletariat will remember this in the ages to come.

[RedWorker]

Everyone, just forget it. The tankie is completely out of touch with reality. I just wish he'd stop polluting this forum.

[ℂᵒиѕẗяᵤкт]

To RedWorker,

I'm sorry you set completely arbitrary criteria, but that doesn't really reflect on my integrity as a Marxist.

[Magón]

To Magon,

So because they have stupid propaganda, they're worthless.

I appreciate you giving me a better idea of your approach to materialist analysis.

They're also worthless because their leadership does nothing in promoting Socialism or Communism, outside or inside, the DPRK. Which is pretty fucking obvious again, to anyone without DPRK-grade blinders on, because the DPRK is neither Socialist or Communist, or want either one to be implemented.

Also, don't forget I said they're worthless because they're leaders of a nation, and again, in this world if someone says that, it's more than likely they're repressing some group or groups that have some actual revolutionary capability.

[RedWorker]

In the whole of North Korea there is not one man with long hair? Such a picture cannot be found? How come I can find one in a minute of anyone from any other country? What do you think is behind this?

Why does the overwhelming majority of North Koreans have no access to the Internet? Why isn't any North Korean on this forum or any other?

Of course, you're not confused, you're just authoritarian scum.

[ℂᵒиѕẗяᵤкт]

To Magon,

Dude, stop. I'm getting wasted.

For the sake of my liver, please actually do anything at all beyond just stamping your foot and repeating yourself. Volume really has little to do in substantiating claims, so producing the same one over and over is really not helping you.

"It's a given" is the same thing creationists tell me when asked to prove God and non-evolutionary "creation."

[Hrafn]

Hey C. I saw thousands of people on the streets of Pyongyang. Not a single pair of jeans, or any long male hair. Just saying.

[ℂᵒиѕẗяᵤкт]

To RedWorker,

I imagine it's a reactionary far-right conspiracy to keep every man in north Korea in short hair on pain of death. Or to keep images of long-haired men off Google Images.

I can't believe I managed to forget the all-important "long hair clause" in the Manifesto.

[ℂᵒиѕẗяᵤкт]

Hey C. I saw thousands of people on the streets of Pyongyang. Not a single pair of jeans, or any long male hair. Just saying.

Are you familiar with DPRK360 at all? The photo project?

[RedWorker]

So it's just a coincidence that there is no proof whatsoever of there being one man out of the millions of people in a country (which is widely said to be extremely authoritarian) with long hair, when suhc proof is available for nearly all other countries, and this means nothing at all? Are you that stupid?

[Magón]

To Magon,

Dude, stop. I'm getting wasted.

For the sake of my liver, please actually do anything at all beyond just stamping your foot and repeating yourself. Volume really has little to do in substantiating claims, so producing the same one over and over is really not helping you.

"It's a given" is the same thing creationists tell me when asked to prove God and non-evolutionary "creation."

I had to remind you, because you forgot why, besides their shitty propaganda, the DPRK was worthless. So I had to repeat myself.

And I really don't think you can compare anti-DPRK people with Creationists, because unlike Creationists, there's quite a lot of evidence for why the DPRK is worthless, and just another repressive anti-worker state.

If you weren't, as I told you before, like talking to a brick wall about the DPRK/Juche, you might see something. But, talking to a wall, that doesn't work.

[Tim Cornelis]

To Magon,

Dude, stop. I'm getting wasted.

For the sake of my liver, please actually do anything at all beyond just stamping your foot and repeating yourself. Volume really has little to do in substantiating claims, so producing the same one over and over is really not helping you.

"It's a given" is the same thing creationists tell me when asked to prove God and non-evolutionary "creation."

The reason my posts aren't particularly substantive is because they are not particularly directed at you. I harbour no illusions that I will convince you. Wingnuts deflect any criticism easily, usually by saying 'propaganda!'. It doesn't matter what facts I produce, you will deflect them. Trying to have a substantive discussion with fascists, Juche-ists, or Creationists is a waste of time. That's why it's ironic that you compare us with creationists.

[The Feral Underclass]

Hello I am new here. I'd like to know what my tendency is since I know what my views are but I don't know what tendency these views make me have. Am I a Marxist-Leninist or something else?

First of all I don't believe in democracy. I believe it leads to corruption and I think it's overrated! So in my ideal nation there would be an Authoritarian government.

I believe in centralization, I believe there should be no private property and everything should be owned by a government rather than select people (like in Capitalism).

I consider myself a Socialist, but not a Communist because I do believe there needs to be an all-powerful but benevolent government.

I believe in socialism in one country and civic nationalism. I believe in a powerful armed forces but for defense purposes only. I believe in isolationism. I believe in a nation having self-reliance and and a powerful military to defend itself from Imperialistic nations.

I believe there should be no unemployment, everyone should be able to work and everyone should have equal pay. I believe the Capitalists and Fascists should be imprisoned - that is I don't believe in political freedoms as this would be harmful to the nation's stability. One party and one party only!

I believe racial and ethnic discrimination should be outlawed, we are all one!

Lastly I believe religion should be outlawed. I think it's okay for the populace to believe in something higher but lets leave it at that. We cannot afford religion, everyone would believe different things and maybe they would harm people because they think that's what their religion means. It's better for all if we just outlaw it altogether.

So, what is my political tendency? Thank you!

I hope I did not offend anyone, I have to be honest so you can know what my tendency is.

What's your position on homosexuality?

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

What makes this entire "discussion" about the hairstyles in north Korea particularly ridiculous is that (1) in fact every state regulates clothing to some extent (which I don't think is good, mind, but pretending that somehow the DPRK are teh Nazis!!1!! because of that is mind-bogglingly stupid); (2) conservative attitudes exist even in the absence of official laws (which reminds me, how many pictures of long-haired men from Singapore can you find?); (3) long hair on men and "Western" jeans were officially discouraged in Yugoslavia, yet people plaster the face of comrade-president-marshal Tito on their profile pictures and openly proclaim themselves Titoists without protest (not to mention the curious case of comrade Xha-Xha and the revisionist bell-bottoms).

[ℂᵒиѕẗяᵤкт]

To Tim,

Well, no, the reason they're not particularly substantive is because you have nothing to substantiate. And yes, every post you've made has been clearly directed at me. This is getting tragic.


To Magon,

I hear the same exact thing from creationists, actually -- that I'm a "brick wall." Again, creationists say this when I point out that they've consistently failed to substantiate anything, and this is really the only place they have left to go. Or "You need to wake up," which is a favorite of the neocons I encounter.

You can rationalize your failure to provide anything substantive to the discussion by acting like I'm not worth it, but the evidence just keeps piling up that no substance will ever be forthcoming from anyone dogmatically opposed to Juche.

[RedWorker]

It's funny to see that the Spart, in solidarity with the tankie, is now also mimicking the DPRK propaganda apparatus in typing "north Korea" rather than "North Korea".

And you see no specific problem with a society being so authoritarian that not even long hair on men exists?

[ℂᵒиѕẗяᵤкт]

The whole "long hair" thing is especially ridiculous, because RedWorker is doing his best to imply that this is due to some kind of law or action of the state.

He could be correct, but to establish his correctness, he would have to actually cite the law. In the absence of this citation, he's going to have to do some impressive gymnastics to ssert that this has nothing to do with the fact that north Korean men probably don't feel like wearing their hair long. Even state propaganda to encourage short hair isn't the same thing as coercion, and I'm not sure why encouraging short hair is far-right.

Let me point out that I believe people ought to be able to wear their hair however they like to. I disagree with the pre-restoration Albanian stance on beards for the same reason, but I'm going to take a lot of convincing that this emerged from a far-right ideology.

[ℂᵒиѕẗяᵤкт]

To RedWorker,

So now the shift key is evidence of our being brainwashed.

Am I on RevLeft or is InfoWars playing a very elaborate prank on me?

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

It's funny to see that the Spart, in solidarity with the tankie, is now also mimicking the DPRK propaganda apparatus in typing "north Korea" rather than "North Korea".

And you see no specific problem with a society being so authoritarian that not even long hair on men exists?

You do realise there is no state called "North Korea", right? I use either form, actually, but this sort of nitpicking really does not make your case look that good.

And of course I have a problem with cultural conservatism; I also have a problem with pretending that N/north Korea (People's Republic of, Democratic) is somehow unique when it comes to attitudes toward long hair and so on. As I said, Yugoslavia was the same, yet people who idolise Tito (and yes, they idolise him, whereas I've never heard people who call themselves Jucheists or what have you go "Oh my God Kim Il Sung was sooo coool he single-handedly fought off the Nazis and probably killed Stalin because he was an ultra-manly secret agent type") are not harassed as people who find something interesting in Kimilsungism or Juche or however it's called this week are.

[Slavic]

So it's just a coincidence that there is no proof whatsoever of there being one man out of the millions of people in a country (which is widely said to be extremely authoritarian) with long hair, when suhc proof is available for nearly all other countries, and this means nothing at all? Are you that stupid?


Could you find me a picture of a man with long hair in <1950s US? I'm having a hard time finding one and I think it is because the US must be regulating every male's hair length on pain of death.

Also everyone knows that the longer the male population's hair is in a given country, the more leftist said county is. That is just Marxism 101.

[Magón]

To Magon,

I hear the same exact thing from creationists, actually -- that I'm a "brick wall." Again, creationists say this when I point out that they've consistently failed to substantiate anything, and this is really the only place they have left to go. Or "You need to wake up," which is a favorite of the neocons I encounter.

You can rationalize your failure to provide anything substantive to the discussion by acting like I'm not worth it, but the evidence just keeps piling up that no substance will ever be forthcoming from anyone dogmatically opposed to Juche.

And so somehow "substance" will be forthcoming from someone dogmatically proposed to support Juche? I don't think so.

Again, like talking to a brick wall. I'm not trying to change your mind, just saying that your view on Juche is fucking dumb, because the Juche ideology is fucking dumb. You're so dogmatically for Juche, you just throw everything said negatively about it, out the window and call it all "Western propaganda" or something else. Tim already said this, so I won't repeat him. But honestly, if you think Juche is somehow Socialistic or Communistic, you yourself might want to start picking up some things to support your end of things, instead of just claiming everyone else as being "equal" to Creationists, and whatever.

[The Garbage Disposal Unit]

OK, so I don't mean this as a defence of the DPRK, but, seriously: Edgy fashion as a way to gauge freedom?

That is some dumbass liberal nonsense.

[ℂᵒиѕẗяᵤкт]

To Magon,

Take a look at the first sentence in your response. Instead of providing anything to substantiate anything you're saying, you basically just saying "well, you too!" Wasn't that the Fox News response when Jon Stewart said their "fair and balanced" reporting was, in fact, biased?

I'm glad, though, that you've been forthright in admitting all you really have to say on the subject is "Juche is dumb." At least now I don't have to pretend like I'm talking to someone with anything worth saying.

[ℂᵒиѕẗяᵤкт]

OK, so I don't mean this as a defence of the DPRK, but, seriously: Edgy fashion as a way to gauge freedom?

That is some dumbass liberal nonsense.

You couldn't be more wrong. That was RedWorker's masterful deathblow to my position and the most substantive argument against it here.

[Magón]

To Magon,

Take a look at the first sentence in your response. Instead of providing anything to substantiate anything you're saying, you basically just saying "well, you too!" Wasn't that the Fox News response when Jon Stewart said their "fair and balanced" reporting was, in fact, biased?

I'm glad, though, that you've been forthright in admitting all you really have to say on the subject is "Juche is dumb." At least now I don't have to pretend like I'm talking to someone with anything worth saying.

Honestly, all you've been doing is proving my point that talking with someone about the DPRK, and Juche at all, is like talking to a brick wall. I told you before, when you thought I was attacking your activism, because of your politics, that this is the very reason not to bother with someone who supports the DPRK or Juche, because it's like a brick wall. Anything and everything you say, just gets turned around on you, like somehow they outsmarted you.

If you think that some sort of substance will come from holding such dogmatic views of the DPRK, as you do, then by all means, please, show me where I have been wrong and so misinformed about the DPRK and Juche. Link me some facts about the DPRK and how it's pro-Socialist/Communist, and a worker's state, or anything at all that is actually something you have to adhere to on this site, so you don't get put in OI.

Because everything about the DPRK, and Juche, is OI material. Same goes for those who support the DPRK/Juche. Which is why I honestly was curious why you weren't there, when before, I know DPRK/Juche supporters were put there.

[ℂᵒиѕẗяᵤкт]

To Magon,

So you're just reinforcing that you have nothing of substance in your criticisms of Juche, and you're trying to deflect that by making it my responsibility to prove to you Juche is not all the things you've said.

I had a very good conversation with Sabot Cat about the subject in PM, mostly because she was willing to hear me out and wasn't just plugging her ears and chanting "brick wall! brick wall!"

So just keep on with repeating yourself, I guess.

[RedWorker]

Can someone please just ban/restrict ℂᵒиѕẗяᵤкт?

[ℂᵒиѕẗяᵤкт]

To RedWorker,

For what infractions am I responsible? You know, besides supporting a conspiracy to disallow men from wearing their hair long.

Are you really so impotent and petty that the only way you can be happy is if someone who doesn't buy into your laughably weak arguments is made by someone else to go away?

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

Can someone please just ban/restrict ℂᵒиѕẗяᵤкт?

I don't know, can you stop whining for five minutes and actually contribute something to this site?

[Magón]

To Magon,

So you're just reinforcing that you have nothing of substance in your criticisms of Juche, and you're trying to deflect that by making it my responsibility to prove to you Juche is not all the things you've said.

I had a very good conversation with Sabot Cat about the subject in PM, mostly because she was willing to hear me out and wasn't just plugging her ears and chanting "brick wall! brick wall!"

So just keep on with repeating yourself, I guess.

How about this, I'll shut my mouth, and you bring up some support for Juche to prove me wrong. And by doing that, you might prove Tim wrong too. Because if my view on the DPRK and Juche is wrong, and all I've read (which isn't just a bunch of "Western propaganda", as you would put it,) is wrong, I would like to be directed in the right direction.

Also, for fun reading, but might be taken as "Western propaganda": http://www.fifthestate.org/archive/390-fall-2013/anarchist-north-korea/

[ℂᵒиѕẗяᵤкт]

I don't know, can you stop whining for five minutes and actually contribute something to this site?

I can't be the only one who has noticed that the only posts RedWorker has ever made that wasn't in a direct response to criticism of him are reminding people how much he hates Stalin and putting down newcomers by passive-aggressively informing them that they are not Real Marxists™.

I feel like the only reason he's calling for my ban is to try to divert attention away from his own very good reasons to be banned himself.

[ℂᵒиѕẗяᵤкт]

To Magon,

You can't really expect to shame me out of calling out your bullshit citations by putting "propaganda" in scare-quotes, especially when the title of the article is "The Opposite of Freedom."

I'm sure I already let you know how Sabot Cat was able to successfully engage me in a conversation about my view of Juche, and that began in an honest demonstration of good faith. That is, she asked because she had a genuine interest in understanding. You're doing this because you want to maneuver me in such a way as to shut me down.

Take some pointers from Sabot Cat if you're honestly curious about me and my beliefs. In the meantime, though, the whole "shutting your mouth" idea is one worth exploring until such time as you have anything to contribute.

[ℂᵒиѕẗяᵤкт]

To Magon,

You can't really expect to shame me out of calling out your bullshit citations by putting "propaganda" in scare-quotes, especially when the title of the article is "The Opposite of Freedom."

I'm sure I already let you know how Sabot Cat was able to successfully engage me in a conversation about my view of Juche, and that began in an honest demonstration of good faith. That is, she asked because she had a genuine interest in understanding. You're doing this because you want to maneuver me in such a way as to shut me down.

Take some pointers from Sabot Cat if you're honestly curious about me and my beliefs. In the meantime, though, the whole "shutting your mouth" idea is one worth exploring until such time as you have anything to contribute.

[Magón]

To Magon,

You can't really expect to shame me out of calling out your bullshit citations by putting "propaganda" in scare-quotes, especially when the title of the article is "The Opposite of Freedom."

I'm sure I already let you know how Sabot Cat was able to successfully engage me in a conversation about my view of Juche, and that began in an honest demonstration of good faith. That is, she asked because she had a genuine interest in understanding. You're doing this because you want to maneuver me in such a way as to shut me down.

Take some pointers from Sabot Cat if you're honestly curious about me and my beliefs. In the meantime, though, the whole "shutting your mouth" idea is one worth exploring until such time as you have anything to contribute.

Well, I don't need to have a conversation really about Juche, or the DPRK because I knew before this thread was even a thing, years back, that Juche was bullshit.

But here's some current (as in the last few years) M-L reading for you on Juche.

http://anti-imperialism.com/2013/11/19/towards-a-concrete-analysis-of-the-dprk/

(This one particularly shows the faults of Juche. Again, the guy's a Stalinist just so you know.)
http://espressostalinist.com/2011/11/02/the-juche-idea-in-the-light-of-marxism-leninism/

[ℂᵒиѕẗяᵤкт]

To Maogn,

I actually used to personally know the gent who runs Anti-Imperialism, and he's kind of a buffoon. I also have my reservations about Espresso Stalinist, something I've mentioned elsewhere on RevLeft, although I briefly participated in the S.S.N.A. with him and a few comrades.

I have Leninist friends whose criticisms of Juche I'm willing to hear out, but I don't automatically take seriously every M-L I meet.

[Magón]

To Maogn,

I actually used to personally know the gent who runs Anti-Imperialism, and he's kind of a buffoon. I also have my reservations about Espresso Stalinist, something I've mentioned elsewhere on RevLeft, although I briefly participated in the S.S.N.A. with him and a few comrades.

I have Leninist friends whose criticisms of Juche I'm willing to hear out, but I don't automatically take seriously every M-L I meet.

Holy fuck, you have an excuse for everything, don't you? Really, talking to a brick wall, man. That's all you are, when it comes to Juche/DPRK. Just a brick wall.

Does anyone else see this? I mean, he wanted me to show some examples, so I did and then he just blows them all off as nothing. Holy fuck.

[ℂᵒиѕẗяᵤкт]

To Magon,

Don't be an ass. I'm familiar with their theoretical work and I don't find them substantive.

Take a look, though, in the other thread. I've expressed concession on the point of the Juche Idea.

Take note that this was because someone actually put some goddamn effort into their arguments instead of just acting like a petulant child.

[Magón]

To Magon,

Don't be an ass. I'm familiar with their theoretical work and I don't find them substantive.

Take a look, though, in the other thread. I've expressed concession on the point of the Juche Idea.

Take note that this was because someone actually put some goddamn effort into their arguments instead of just acting like a petulant child.

Hey man, you're the one who was just blowing off people's replies to you, saying they were "Western propaganda" and shit. You were the dogmatist for a faulty as fuck, ideology. And you asked for substance, which I gave you, but you were an ass, and just blew it off. Did you even read what I linked you? You certainly didn't read the first link I gave you, you just jumped right to blowing it off because of it's title. Like, I should make clear, a dogmatist and ass would do. So who was really the ass?

[ℂᵒиѕẗяᵤкт]

To Magon,

Still you, I'm afraid. The first article you linked me to was rife with bias and really had nothing of substance to add to the conversation.

As much as I dislike Tim Cornelis personally, he was willing to put in some actual work and I was willing to come around to giving up Juche because of it.

It's almost as though he put real, genuine thought into his argument instead of Googling support for it after the fact. Again, he's the one who got the results.

[Magón]

To Magon,

Still you, I'm afraid. The first article you linked me to was rife with bias and really had nothing of substance to add to the conversation.

As much as I dislike Tim Cornelis personally, he was willing to put in some actual work and I was willing to come around to giving up Juche because of it.

It's almost as though he put real, genuine thought into his argument instead of Googling support for it after the fact. Again, he's the one who got the results.

Rife with bias. Funny, coming from someone who was so dogmatic and unwilling to look at something because of his dogmatism, calling anything against him "Western propaganda".

And I told you already, I'm not trying to change your mind, and it wasn't like I was competing with Tim. I agree with Tim, so why would I compete with him for some reason? But you were for the most part, just calling anything Tim said, as "Western propaganda" and shit.

And I didn't just google those, that's quite an assumption, thinking you know what I may or may not have on my computer.

[ℂᵒиѕẗяᵤкт]

To Magon,

I apologize for being an ass. I feel like your characterizations of my problems with what you were saying are off the mark, just to be clear, but there's no denying I was being dogmatic.

[Magón]

To Magon,

I apologize for being an ass. I feel like your characterizations of my problems with what you were saying are off the mark, just to be clear, but there's no denying I was being dogmatic.

This is why I really don't like to argue about the DPRK/Juche, because like you've realized, dogmatism gets the better of that group, and as I said, it's like talking to a brick wall. But really, dogmatism can get the best of any ideology, Juche supporters just come out swinging with it though, as if nothing else is there. But whatever.

[ℂᵒиѕẗяᵤкт]

To Magon,

Well, keep in mind I still express solidarity with efforts being undertaken in north Korea, so I will still characterize some accusations levied against the state as having their basis in imperialist propaganda.

That said, I no longer defend the Juche formulation of certain principles I find sound, like the workers being the masters of their own destinies or the need for creativity and independence in carving a way out of capitalism into a better world. Whether the north Korean government has embodied these principles consistently leads to several questions the answers to which I'm uncertain (or certain, but not in the affirmative). Same with Cuba, I suppose.

[Magón]

To Magon,

Well, keep in mind I still express solidarity with efforts being undertaken in north Korea, so I will still characterize some accusations levied against the state as having their basis in imperialist propaganda.

That said, I no longer defend the Juche formulation of certain principles I find sound, like the workers being the masters of their own destinies or the need for creativity and independence in carving a way out of capitalism into a better world. Whether the north Korean government has embodied these principles consistently leads to several questions the answers to which I'm uncertain (or certain, but not in the affirmative). Same with Cuba, I suppose.

What efforts are these? In North Korea that is.

And I've lived in Cuba, just so you know. Not as hot as people think. Although there weather can be most of the time.

[ℂᵒиѕẗяᵤкт]

Well, questions can be raised as to whether north Korea is genuinely socialist or not, but I think people underestimate exactly how much workplace democracy exists there. I forget the exact name they use for it, but, except for the cooperatives, workers generally have control over their place of work.

There's also the whole education and health care stuff. Not socialist, but a step in the right direction. And the reduced work days, etc.

[JahLemon]

Well, questions can be raised as to whether north Korea is genuinely socialist or not, but I think people underestimate exactly how much workplace democracy exists there. I forget the exact name they use for it, but, except for the cooperatives, workers generally have control over their place of work.
Could you provide some evidence of this.

[ℂᵒиѕẗяᵤкт]

What are you looking for, specifically, JahLemon?

[JahLemon]

An example of workplace democracy in the North. I've always been under the impression that the State owned and controlled everything.

[The Feral Underclass]

Well, questions can be raised as to whether north Korea is genuinely socialist or not, but I think people underestimate exactly how much workplace democracy exists there. I forget the exact name they use for it, but, except for the cooperatives, workers generally have control over their place of work.

There's also the whole education and health care stuff. Not socialist, but a step in the right direction. And the reduced work days, etc.

Does this apply to the labour camps?

[Tim Cornelis]

The name is Taean Work System. This system is slightly different from what is ordinarily meant by workplace democracy. It is more like representative democracy in the workplace supplemented by technocratic methods.
Of course, all Stalinist derivative states have claimed to have some degree of workers' control over production, although for some reason the Yugoslav model is best remembered. This may be because it had the most actual workers' input, as opposed to mere nominal workers' control and cooperatives.
And as with those systems, 'democracy' in the Taean Work System was only nominal: "The secretary of the factory a member of the provincial party chapter, presided over the factory party committee, organized production and management goals, and was responsible for ensuring that policy and political directives were followed in the factory. This role gave the secretary tremendous control, despite the appearance of a consensual decision-making organization, and some party chiefs abused their power by making unilateral decisions without regard to the managers of the factory ... As with the Taean Work System, the Ch'ongsan-ni Method largely ceased to function by the early 2000s." (North Korea: A Country Study)

So in essence, it's, on paper, a corporatist system, but dysfunctional.

Healthcare is also nominally free. I recall reading reports that stated that doctors demand informal payment for services.

[ℂᵒиѕẗяᵤкт]

Yeah, Tim's got the right thing, although I didn't know much about how it worked, specifically. It's hard to get any information on north Korea, so, while it would be intellectually dishonest to dismiss anything out of hand, I still need to approach what information I get with caution, as much as with positive things as with the negative.

[Lord Testicles]

Yeah, Tim's got the right thing, although I didn't know much about how it worked, specifically. It's hard to get any information on north Korea, so, while it would be intellectually dishonest to dismiss anything out of hand, I still need to approach what information I get with caution, as much as with positive things as with the negative.

I wonder why that is...

[ℂᵒиѕẗяᵤкт]

To Skinz,

I don't really understand what that adds to the discussion. North Korea is very secrective of what goes on in its borders. If you want to talk about north Korea's human rights issues, then come right out and start a discussion on it, okay? No need to do those weasely snipes.

[Lord Testicles]

To Skinz,

I don't really understand what that adds to the discussion. North Korea is very secrective of what goes on in its borders. If you want to talk about north Korea's human rights issues, then come right out and start a discussion on it, okay? No need to do those weasely snipes.

When I read "weasely snipes" I immediately pictured Wesley Snipes. :lol:

I don't really need to discuss Best Korea's human rights "issues" (if that's what you want to call them, I'd be less euphemistic and call them what they are: abuses) because it's an open and shut case.

By the way, what exactly did you just add to the discussion? You didn't explain why North Korea is very secretive, you just got defensive.

[ℂᵒиѕẗяᵤкт]

To Skinz,

So, no, you don't have anything to add.

If I'm getting defensive, it's because I don't really need a running commentary on my own posts when there could actually be an exchange. And I really don't need to see RedWorker's name under every single post responding to one of mine.

[Lord Testicles]

To Skinz,

So, no, you don't have anything to add.

If I'm getting defensive, it's because I don't really need a running commentary on my own posts when there could actually be an exchange. And I really don't need to see RedWorker's name under every single post responding to one of mine.

I wasn't giving a running commentary of your posts. I was wondering aloud why it's so hard to get information out of Best Korea, because you know, it's just such a swell place!

[ℂᵒиѕẗяᵤкт]

To Skinz,

So because of general protectiveness, they're bad.

Great materialism you got there.

At least Tim did some actual work. Christ, why is even a modicum of effort such a rarity for the "leftists" here?

[Lord Testicles]

To Skinz,

So because of general protectiveness, they're bad.

Great materialism you got there.

At least Tim did some actual work. Christ, why is even a modicum of effort such a rarity for the "leftists" here?

"General Protectiveness"? I don't recall saying anything was bad. What I understand about Best Korea is that the lives of the people seem miserable and the ruling clique don't seem very interested in changing that, and it could be argued that they are responsible for that misery. Effort is not required.

[ℂᵒиѕẗяᵤкт]

Effort is not required.

The mantra of RevLeft.

[Lord Testicles]

The mantra of RevLeft.

You can justify your nonsense however you wish. I notice you didn't want to correct my understanding of Best Korea, why is that?

I don't think support for states, especially hereditary dictatorships has any place on the left. Maybe you can tell me why anyone outside of the small group of people that run Best Korea would think Best Korea is a good place?

[ℂᵒиѕẗяᵤкт]

You can justify your nonsense however you wish. I notice you didn't want to correct my understanding of Best Korea, why is that?

I don't think support for states, especially hereditary dictatorships has any place on the left. Maybe you can tell me why anyone outside of the small group of people that run Best Korea would think Best Korea is a good place?

Boy, are you out of the loop.

But I like how pointing out that a half-assed, snide remark isn't a very substantial addition to a conversation is the same thing as supporting a state wholesale.

I'm just glad RevLeft exists to contain all this shit.

[Lord Testicles]

Boy, are you out of the loop.

But I like how pointing out that a half-assed, snide remark isn't a very substantial addition to a conversation is the same thing as supporting a state wholesale.

I'm just glad RevLeft exists to contain all this shit.

I'm under the impression that you support Best Korea. Do you not support the DPRK?

Also, I realise that I may be "out of the loop" but what am I out of the loop on exactly?

[ℂᵒиѕẗяᵤкт]

I'm under the impression that you support Best Korea. Do you not support the DPRK?

Also, I realise that I may be "out of the loop" but what am I out of the loop on exactly?

You're under the wrong impression if you think I'm uncritical of north Korea.

What you're out of the loop on is the big discussion earlier about Juche and the D.P.R.K., where I made very clear my stance on the state and the politics of the country.

[Lord Testicles]

You're under the wrong impression if you think I'm uncritical of north Korea.

What you're out of the loop on is the big discussion earlier about Juche and the D.P.R.K., where I made very clear my stance on the state and the politics of the country.

I read the thread before posting so I'm informed on the "Let's trim our hair in accordance with the socialist lifestyle" discussion and your "solidarity with the efforts being undertaken in north Korea".

Why can't you answer any questions directly?

"You're under the wrong impression if you think I'm uncritical of north Korea."

Is not a satisfactory answer to: "Do you not support the DPRK?"

[ℂᵒиѕẗяᵤкт]

To Skinz,

If I say "yes," you're going to take that as meaning I unequivocally endorse everything done by the north Korean government.

If I say "no," is that going to be taken as an assumption that I don't think there's anything progressive at all about some things being done in north Korea or that I don't support it against comprehensive sanctions and imperialist warfare?

I'll answer the question once you stop begging it, in other words. If that's not a satisfactory response, just go ahead with whatever answer you like best; you'll be doing it anyway.

[Lord Testicles]

To Skinz,

If I say "yes," you're going to take that as meaning I unequivocally endorse everything done by the north Korean government.

If I say "no," is that going to be taken as an assumption that I don't think there's anything progressive at all about some things being done in north Korea or that I don't support it against comprehensive sanctions and imperialist warfare?

I'll answer the question once you stop begging it, in other words. If that's not a satisfactory response, just go ahead with whatever answer you like best; you'll be doing it anyway.

These are all your assumptions and you know what they say about people who assume. If you were to say "yes" (which is what I'm expecting to be honest) then my next question would be "why?" If you answer "no" then the extent of my assumptions would be that you don't support the DPRK. I would not assume that you support wars or sanctions just because you don't support a state.

[ℂᵒиѕẗяᵤкт]

To Skinz,

Then define "support" for me, because apparently you don't mean either being uncritical or supporting it against imperialism.

[Lord Testicles]

To Skinz,

Then define "support" for me, because apparently you don't mean either being uncritical or supporting it against imperialism.

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=support+define

Have you though about becoming a politician? Because you've got answering questions like one down to a tee.

[ℂᵒиѕẗяᵤкт]

To Skinz,

http://youtu.be/MmFqAuVZMTY

So you know I'm against imperialist efforts against the country, and you know that, while I'm not uncritical of the government, there are some things I like about it and many things I don't buy about it.

So if that didn't answer your question well before you even asked it, then I don't know what you're asking. You could try being more clear, but that's not really what this is all about, is it?

[Lord Testicles]

To Skinz,

So you know I'm against imperialist efforts against the country, and you know that, while I'm not uncritical of the government, there are some things I like about it and many things I don't buy about it.

So if that didn't answer your question well before you even asked it, then I don't know what you're asking.

Everyone on this site is "against imperialist efforts" you're not going to find anyone saying "I support X imperialist war against Y" so that's a moot point. What are the things you like?


You could try being more clear, but that's not really what this is all about, is it?

I've been as clear as I could be. Apart from the throw away comment you got super defensive about, you've been as evasive and defensive as possible when it's come to answering simple questions. So cut the crap and let's not even begin the "they're out to get me" bullshit.

[ℂᵒиѕẗяᵤкт]

To Skinz,

No, I haven't been evasive. I asked you to be clear, because, as you just admitted, you already knew all of those things about my position on north Korea. Given that they all answer to what degree or in what contexts I support north Korea, I didn't know what else you could be asking.

So, you know, instead of baiting me and saying I'd make a good politician (right before chiding me for being "defensive"), maybe you could put in an effort?

[Lord Testicles]

To Skinz,

No, I haven't been evasive. I asked you to be clear, because, as you just admitted, you already knew all of those things about my position on north Korea. Given that they all answer to what degree or in what contexts I support north Korea, I didn't know what else you could be asking.

So, you know, instead of baiting me and saying I'd make a good politician (right before chiding me for being "defensive"), maybe you could put in an effort?

So yet again you're dodging a simple question. Talk about not being evasive!

[ℂᵒиѕẗяᵤкт]

Evading a question by first answering it then asking what was being asked when that answer is apparently unsatisfactory.

You'd make a good Fox News Pundit.

[Lord Testicles]

Evading a question by first answering it then asking what was being asked when that answer is apparently unsatisfactory.

You'd make a good Fox News Pundit.

Fuck you. You literally have not answered the question. Your evasiveness would make Michael Howard proud. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1KHMO14KuJk)So I'll try one last time:

You said: "I'm against imperialist efforts against the country, and you know that, while I'm not uncritical of the government, there are some things I like about it and many things I don't buy about it."

So I asked and ask again: "What are the things you like (about the DPRK)?"

Why is this so hard for you to answer?

[ℂᵒиѕẗяᵤкт]

To Skinz,

Yes, I have. Stop being a child.

[Lord Testicles]

To Skinz,

Yes, I have. Stop being a child.

Fucking hell! I'm glad this is over the internet so I don't get done for assault.

Where have you answered the above question you fucking waste of perfectly good carbon?

[ℂᵒиѕẗяᵤкт]

To Skinz,

Calm down. You're actually threatening to beat me up, now.

Get your temper under control.

[Lord Testicles]

10/10

Would be trolled again.

Glad we could clear up the fact that your politics hold no substance. Rebellious teenager trying to be edgy: confirmed.

[ℂᵒиѕẗяᵤкт]

To Skinz,

So you threw a tantrum and want to save face by first accusing me of trolling then saying I'm being genuine, but my politics have no substance.

Stay revolutionary.

[Lord Testicles]

Jesus, Mary and Joseph Stalin! Why can't you just answer a simple question? Why is it that all you can post is shit? I was genuinely interested in what you thought were the good things about the DPRK, I thought they'd be laughable but I was interested to hear them nonetheless and I was more than prepared to be surprised and find out that there are actually some good things happening there. Now I just think you're an insufferable fuckwit who should be force-fed dog shit.

Yes, I think your politics have no substance as show by your utter and total inability to answer the most simple of questions. I also think you're a troll as shown by your wilful ignorance and inability to engage in any meaningful discussion. Of course maybe you're neither, maybe you're just thick.

[ℂᵒиѕẗяᵤкт]

To Skinz,

Pull yourself together, will you? You don't need to lose your shit over the internet, dude.

I thought you meant the question we'd be arguing about for most of the thread. As for what I like, I like the universal health care and education. I like the reduced work hours. I like the unions. I kind of like the limited party pluralism, even. I like the women's organizations. Their press statements are problematic in terms of homophobia, but the official policy on L.G.B.T. persons is that their sexuality is natural and nothing objectionable. I actually do think they have a degree of democracy there, too.

Every last thing I like is subject to question, especially regarding their place in the overall north Korean system. But there you go.

Maybe don't accuse someone of jumping the gun with being defensive when you're so goddamn trigger happy yourself. Seriously, you were really itching to let me have that "you have no substance!" rant, huh?

Threaten to beat me up again. Maybe it'll get it out of your system.

[Lord Testicles]

Pull yourself together, will you? You don't need to lose your shit over the internet, dude.

Maybe don't accuse someone of jumping the gun with being defensive when you're so goddamn trigger happy yourself. Seriously, you were really itching to let me have that "you have no substance!" rant, huh?

Threaten to beat me up again. Maybe it'll get it out of your system.

Firstly, cut your condescending shit you fucking bubbling cats anus. No, I wasn't "itching to let you have "X" rant", your evasiveness and inability to answer the most simple of questions is literally that annoying. (That's what makes you such a pro troll I guess)


I thought you meant the question we'd be arguing about for most of the thread. As for what I like, I like the universal health care and education. I like the reduced work hours. I like the unions. I kind of like the limited party pluralism, even. I like the women's organizations. Their press statements are problematic in terms of homophobia, but the official policy on L.G.B.T. persons is that their sexuality is natural and nothing objectionable. I actually do think they have a degree of democracy there, too.

Evidence for the existence of any and all of this. You don't honestly think I'm going to buy that shit just because you've typed it?


Every last thing I like is subject to question, especially regarding their place in the overall north Korean system. But there you go.

Yeah, this is a political discussion board, it's how things work.

[ℂᵒиѕẗяᵤкт]

To Skinz,

Save the creative name-calling for someone who's actually intimidated by you.

I'm happy to bring up what I've read to lead me to like those things (although fucking Google is your friend, sometimes, tough guy) on the condition that you take a chill pill and act like a grown person. But what's all this about pissing on your head? You asked me to enumerate the things I like about north Korea. I did so, after you flipped your shit about me not doing so. And now you're still frothing at the mouth, like I suddenly brought all this up to convince you to agree with me.

I was actually watching T.V., and it really isn't my fucking job to serve anything up to you unless I began a discussion with the intent to persuade, even if some nobody on the internet will feverishly pound the keyboard in letting everyone know how little substance not immediately meeting his every demand to his satisfaction shows I have. So when you're ready to act like you got some goddamn sense and drop the internet tough guy nonsense, I'll be happy to work with you.

Until then, will you let a guy watch some Dragonball Z and just enjoy talking to people? Fuck Almighty

[Lord Testicles]

I don't even care any more, I just hope someone stabs you one day.

[ℂᵒиѕẗяᵤкт]

I don't even care any more, I just hope someone stabs you one day.

Internet Leftism: The Post

[Magón]

Well, questions can be raised as to whether north Korea is genuinely socialist or not, but I think people underestimate exactly how much workplace democracy exists there. I forget the exact name they use for it, but, except for the cooperatives, workers generally have control over their place of work.

There's also the whole education and health care stuff. Not socialist, but a step in the right direction. And the reduced work days, etc.

You know, I'm really going to have to call you out on something you were doing to me, and ask you start to give us all some links and stuff, in support of the DPRK/Juche, whatever. Because all you've been doing since we talked, and before when you were just talking with Tim, is give absolutely nothing to support your side of things, while you've complained about other people doing the same thing who are opposed to the DPRK/Juche.

And in one of your posts, you even admitted that it was difficult to find information out of the DPRK, so do you actually have anything to support it, (again, links, videos, etc.) or no, that isn't just some DPRK propaganda.

Because honestly, if you still support the DPRK in anyway, but you yourself don't have any information from inside it that is substantial, as the information you've wanted from everyone else, has to be, then how can you show support if you really don't know what's going on in the country, and have any actual idea about it, outside of some idea you have based on some trickles of information? It sounds like you really don't have a clue on why you should support the DPRK.

[ℂᵒиѕẗяᵤкт]

To Magon,

I don't know when you posted this, but I've been napping.

That almost sounded like a comradely request up until you said I don't have a clue what I'm talking about. I really don't know what it is with you, but if you're really going to keep doing this shit, why do I owe you anything?

Listen, I'm going to sleep. PM me or something about this. Maybe we can start a thread or something. In the meantime, though, can you cool it a little? And by that I mean you seem too eager to "get" me on something, what with that last crack. You seem like a more well-kept-together guy than Skinz, so let's approach this fresh in the daylight and with some civility; what do you say?

[Magón]

To Magon,

I don't know when you posted this, but I've been napping.

That almost sounded like a comradely request up until you said I don't have a clue what I'm talking about. I really don't know what it is with you, but if you're really going to keep doing this shit, why do I owe you anything?

Listen, I'm going to sleep. PM me or something about this. Maybe we can start a thread or something. In the meantime, though, can you cool it a little? And by that I mean you seem too eager to "get" me on something, what with that last crack. You seem like a more well-kept-together guy than Skinz, so let's approach this fresh in the daylight and with some civility; what do you say?

I say you should start showing some links and evidence for your position, instead of interpreting things so personally. You did the same thing when I had to explain, I wasn't attacking your activism and politics, I was talking about your politics alone. Because otherwise, and I'm not trying to "get" you, you do sound like you don't have a clue, you're still just blindly asserting you support the DPRK, with no evidence for it. Just this time, there's less of the dogmatism going on.

[ℂᵒиѕẗяᵤкт]

I'm going to take that as a "no."

[The Feral Underclass]

I'm going to take that as a "no."

Any so-called socialist who supports the DPRK, whether critically or uncritically, has absolutely no credibility whatsoever. Suggesting that a reasonable debate can be had with someone with such wildly ridiculous views is just a non-starter. Even suggesting that this is possible would give legitimacy to your lunacy.

[Palmares]

I'm, not convinced this thread should be continued. It's deteriorated into some back and forth personal-style beef. If by some unfortunate possibility it does continue, a focus on evidenced based assertions (as Magón and possibly others have already said) would be preferably to the primarily opinion based posts present here.

I gotta say though, supporting the DPRK is like being a climate sceptic, the evidence is overwhelmingly stacked against them.

[Trap Queen Voxxy]

Sounds like Juche. Not all of it, but some.

If I see so much as 'ju' uttered again in this thread I will pull each and everyone of yours ears. You guys misbehave so much when I'm gone. Harrumph, anyway, now then, your tendency should be to kick ass, as is mine, not to figure out "oh, me and the 23rd national congress of senile Albanian accountants agree with each other like perfectly!"

[RedWorker]

I like the universal health care and education.

Firstly, that exists in many Western states, to various degrees. Second, the quality and availability of these systems in the DPRK is to be questioned.


I like the reduced work hours.

Official information from the DPRK says that the 8-hour day is used (which is standard in Western states, but for example in France there is a reduced working day) and unofficial reports suggest that workers work longer than that and in bad conditions, with no respect to workers' rights. There is clearly deep inequality, with the average worker living a much worse life than one of the elite.


I like the unions.

There is no visible workers' movement in North Korea. There are no reports of any strikes or other workers' actions. All known demonstrations have been organized by the state and only support the status quo, calling for no change. Workers are not free to form their own unions: the only unions allowed are that of the state. This is obvious because there is no other union in North Korea at all.

North Korea itself admits that the only existing union's purpose is to support the leadership and all policy as it currently exists: "Its fundamental principle in its building and activities is to faithfully support the WPK’s ideas and leadership, regarding the WPK’s guidance as its lifeline."

The purpose of a normal union is to call for change, to challenge whatever leadership or status quo there is. Not so here.


I kind of like the limited party pluralism, even

There is no party pluralism of any sort, not even "limited". The two other parties are servants of the state and do not challenge any policy of the WPK. They do not ever question anything, and they in fact have no activity at all other than on paper. At elections there is always only one candidate in each district, which has been pre-selected by the state: you can't increase the support of one party or the other.


I like the women's organizations

There are "women's organizations" in any country. But in this case all "women's organizations", as with any organizations at all, are owned by the state and women are not allowed to form their own ones. (which is obvious from the fact that no others exist)

In any case, the DPRK seems to be sexist with low women's rights.


but the official policy on L.G.B.T. persons is that their sexuality is natural and nothing objectionable. I actually do think they have a degree of democracy there, too.

For starters, propaganda websites set up by North Korea for foreigners do not accurately reflect whatever policies there are actually in place. In any case, the "official policy" in any state is worthless; what is actually done is relevant. And this "official policy" seems to be exactly the same as that of all the Western countries, so what is the difference? The difference is in what actually happens: there is no obvious visible LGBT movement. The WPK makes no sort of statement about gay rights. North Korea opposed an UN resolution calling for gay rights (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_rights_at_the_United_Nations).

[Lord Testicles]

Any so-called socialist who supports the DPRK, whether critically or uncritically, has absolutely no credibility whatsoever. Suggesting that a reasonable debate can be had with someone with such wildly ridiculous views is just a non-starter. Even suggesting that this is possible would give legitimacy to your lunacy.

Reasonable debate be damned, you can't even get this guy to answer the simplest questions about his own position, what hope is there for debate let alone a reasonable one?

[RedWorker]

Actually, I accidentally pasted the mission statement of the Kim Il Sung Socialist Youth League, but I can't edit my post.

That of the General Federation of Trade Unions of Korea is this: "It is guided solely by the great Kimilsungism-Kimjongilism. It is an outer organization of the Workers' Party of Korea, a transmission belt linking the Party with trade union members and a reliable assistant to the Party. Its main revolutionary task is to dynamically push ahead with the three revolutions, ideological, technological and cultural, the general line of the WPK."

That of the Union of Agricultural Workers of Korea is this:"It is guided solely by the great Kimilsungism-Kimjongilism. It is an outer organization of the Workers’ Party of Korea, a transmission belt linking the Party with agricultural workers and a reliable assistant to the Party. It sets it as its general task to model the whole union on Kimilsung-Kimjongilism. It strives to solve the rural question completely by implementing the Thesis on the Socialist Rural Question to the letter, build a socialist thriving country and carry through the cause of President Kim Il Sung and leader Kim Jong Il, the revolutionary cause of Juche."

Basically, the opposite of actual unions.

[RedWorker]

OK, so I don't mean this as a defence of the DPRK, but, seriously: Edgy fashion as a way to gauge freedom?

That is some dumbass liberal nonsense.

The point is, obviously, that there is no allowed expression of individual personality, and that homogeneous hair and clothing style is only a derivation from this. Not only are worn items, for instance, completely devoid of any symbols not approved of by the state (the opposite: many people wear clothing which explicitely supports the state, often containing both Kim Il Sung and Kim Jong Il's faces), but so are people's personalities, at least to the extent that people are allowed to display them. All political movements in North Korea are that of the state, and any organization at all by anyone else is not allowed, as evidenced by the fact that it does not exist. There are no signs with material that is unapproved of by the state. There is no evidence of any written message at all, anywhere, that runs contrary to the state's line. All in all we see an example of extreme authoritarianism, which indeed can be classified under the label of totalitarianism.

[Magón]

I'm going to take that as a "no."

Just give some links or something, for why you would support even in the slightest, the DPRK still.

[ℂᵒиѕẗяᵤкт]

To Feral,

That's a great way to excuse yourself from having to confront disagreement, huh?


To RedWorker,

You can deny everything you like, but your bad habit of not really contributing anything of substance continues. When I get to Magon, your "points" will get addressed, however indirectly.


To Skinz,

My god, you've got a chip on your shoulder. Dude, I answered all of your questions.

Pull yourself together, for Christ's sake. I get that you hate that I disagree with you, but you can't just keep throwing a perpetual tantrum.


To Magon,

Will do, but you remember what I asked for, right?

In any case, the things like party pluralism are pretty common knowledge. You've got your W.P.K., your Chongdoist Party, and the Social Democratic Party. They don't oppose the W.P.K., which is enshrined as the lead party in the constitution, but the Chongdoist Party is for the religious farmers and the Social Democratic Party represents the cooperatives.

The health care and education stuff are also things you can look up without specific links.

As for L.G.B.T. rights, there's little explicit in their legal language addressing them either way. The U.N. seems to feel that north Korea is moving toward a more liberal approach to dating and non-marital relationships (http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/topic,45a5fb512,45a5fc112,48187e26c,0,RFA,,.html), but same sex marriage and civil unions don't seem to be on the horizon, which is a major problem. However, the U.N. also finds that there are otherwise no discriminatory practices against L.G.B.T. people and there is nothing like a sodomy law on the books. It rejected a U.N. resolution on L.G.B.T. rights, but north Korea's relationship with the U.N. is based on suspicion of their motives and seeing them as a vassal for rationalizing the imperialist violence of the U.S., which isn't totally out of left field.

Magon, if you'll permit me the time to look for it, I have some information on the Taean work system that I feel presents a different picture from the critical assessment Tim Cornelis presented earlier. (I don't actually have all of these links organized on the off chance I feel the need to whip it out for the internet.) RedWorker shot off a bunch of stuff about unions, but note he never denied their existence; he just had to prepare them in the context of "bad Korea" to not have to deal with them. Information about the unions is scant but otherwise easy to come by. The more in-depth stuff I have is with the Taean links.

I forget what else I mentioned specifically, but Stephen Gowans is a blogger and author I respect who writes on international issues and often brings up north Korea. He's at gowans.WordPress.com, and a lot of his articles about socialism in general touch on north Korea. I would recommend, too, "Do publicly owned, centrally planned economies work?" His "We Lived Better Then" touches on Korea too, but more incidentally. He also has a standing entry called "Why Everything You Hear About North Korea is Nonsense," which is worth a look, although it's very short. I'm sorry I'm not giving you a link to every single thing, but it's easy to navigate that blog, and I've got breakfast to make.

Well, there you go, for now at least. Now, Magon, you get that I'm just responding as to why I think as I do, right?

[RedWorker]

It rejected a U.N. resolution on L.G.B.T. rights, but north Korea's relationship with the U.N. is based on suspicion of their motives and seeing them as a vassal for rationalizing the imperialist violence of the U.S., which isn't totally out of left field.

So what? That argument might make sense if North Korea voted against all U.N. resolutions, but they voted against specifically the gay rights one. And you're back to proving yourself to be stubborn, after I renewed my efforts to interact reasonably with you (which I've always been doing, unlike you) after seeing you take a surprising new stance towards Juche. (yet opportunist, as you basically use it to support North Korea while excusing yourself by saying you don't support certain things. In other words, you're still supporting a regime which you admit does bad things whether you support these bad things or not)

Which makes sense: the facts I spotted were obvious, it can't be that you're oblivious to them and need people to spoon-feed them to you (like you've been begging them to), it's just that you support things like totalitarian control leading to no strikes, and all organizations being state owned. I felt hope for you for a moment before you brought me back to reality again, but who knows, maybe you're just making really slow progress.

[ℂᵒиѕẗяᵤкт]

Fine.

You know what? I am just being stubborn.

Skinz was right from the beginning and I was just being a major dick to pad things out so I didn't have to do any explaining.

I really don't have any idea what I'm talking about.

Maybe you were right about me being banned. I don't know.

[RedWorker]

I commend that you attempt to examine things which are universally hated, but sometimes something is really what it is said to be. You don't need to be banned... as long as you develop a serious aversion to any authoritarianism (and any hint of a lack of personal freedom) as well as to any inequality and privileges, (please don't deny that Kim Jong-Un and his friends live like God while there are many thin people in North Korea) and, in the long run, you need to attempt to examine what most people here would call Marxism (as opposed to what you'd call Marxism).

[ℂᵒиѕẗяᵤкт]

RedWorker,

I've given up on north Korea, but don't push your luck.

In the main, though, all I really know how to do is help people in the here and now. I'm probably not going to live to see any kind of revolution, but I can listen.

I just really don't know where I am anymore.

[Lord Testicles]

I don't think you can even be banned for supporting North Korea or any state, but you should at least be able to explain that support.

[The Feral Underclass]

To Feral,

That's a great way to excuse yourself from having to confront disagreement, huh?

Firstly, you've presented nothing of substance with which to disagree. Secondly if I were to confront whatever it is you're selling using rational argument, it would require me to accept a premise that your views were rational to begin with. Since they are predicated on nonsense, what would be the point?

[Slavic]

The point is, obviously, that there is no allowed expression of individual personality, and that homogeneous hair and clothing style is only a derivation from this. Not only are worn items, for instance, completely devoid of any symbols not approved of by the state (the opposite: many people wear clothing which explicitely supports the state, often containing both Kim Il Sung and Kim Jong Il's faces), but so are people's personalities, at least to the extent that people are allowed to display them. All political movements in North Korea are that of the state, and any organization at all by anyone else is not allowed, as evidenced by the fact that it does not exist. There are no signs with material that is unapproved of by the state. There is no evidence of any written message at all, anywhere, that runs contrary to the state's line. All in all we see an example of extreme authoritarianism, which indeed can be classified under the label of totalitarianism.

Do you actually have proof for all of this? Or are you just posting assumptions?

[Magón]

I've given up on north Korea

Yeah, man, fuck North Korea.


I just really don't know where I am anymore.

Bit dramatic.

[John Nada]

The point is, obviously, that there is no allowed expression of individual personality, and that homogeneous hair and clothing style is only a derivation from this. Not only are worn items, for instance, completely devoid of any symbols not approved of by the state (the opposite: many people wear clothing which explicitely supports the state, often containing both Kim Il Sung and Kim Jong Il's faces), but so are people's personalities, at least to the extent that people are allowed to display them. All political movements in North Korea are that of the state, and any organization at all by anyone else is not allowed, as evidenced by the fact that it does not exist. There are no signs with material that is unapproved of by the state. There is no evidence of any written message at all, anywhere, that runs contrary to the state's line. All in all we see an example of extreme authoritarianism, which indeed can be classified under the label of totalitarianism.Do you actually have proof for all of this? Or are you just posting assumptions?It was US propaganda http://www.nknews.org/2014/03/why-kim-jong-un-hairstyle-order-is-unlikely-true/ http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/aug/04/north-korea-fashion-heels It seems that it's more social norms and peer pressure, rather than a law. Although I wouldn't be surprised if the military has some regulations on haircuts(over a third of the country's in the military or reserves).

Lets see, of all the atrocities DPRK commits in the eyes of some "Marxists"(commodity production,"Special Economic Zones", de facto hereditary rule with a personality cult, revising Marxism without giving Stalin and Mao credit), the worse has got to be making people wear vinyl (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vinylon):laugh:.

A massive military, sham elections with uncontested candidates, fake unions that don't do shit, control over what people(particularly women) wear, a bunch of drugs everywhere, massive prison camps. I'm talking about the US, how's the DPRK.:lol:

[motion denied]

A massive military, sham elections with uncontested candidates, fake unions that don't do shit, control over what people(particularly women) wear, a bunch of drugs everywhere, massive prison camps. I'm talking about the US, how's the DPRK

Could be the US or any other bourgeois state, I agree. What I don't get is how that makes a case for the DPRK.

[John Nada]

Could be the US or any other bourgeois state, I agree. What I don't get is how that makes a case for the DPRK.

I dunno, it doesn't?

[motion denied]

I dunno, it doesn't?

Oh, I think I misread your post then. Sorry about that.

[RedWorker]

I know it is a myth that Kim forced people to cut their hair like his (and the picture of "allowed hairstyles" might be just be a barber shop's suggested hairstyles), but how does this refute my post at all? I said that there is homogeneous hair and clothing styles, and this is partly the result of state interference (which doesn't have to be overt or direct).

[John Nada]

I know it is a myth that Kim forced people to cut their hair like his (and the picture of "allowed hairstyles" might be just be a barber shop's suggested hairstyles), but how does this refute my post at all? I said that there is homogeneous hair and clothing styles, and this is partly the result of state interference (which doesn't have to be overt or direct).

Is there anywhere on the plant Earth where that isn't the case? In what way does DPRK deviate from the norm in that regard?

[RedWorker]

No, it's not at all like that elsewhere. I can go into any country and I'll see people with extravagant hair/clothing styles. I'll also notice ideological symbols in people's clothing, such as communist or anarchist ones. Not so in North Korea, except the ones worshipping the Kim family and the state. Like I said, there's no evidence at all that there is even ANY written message which challenges the state or even any of its positions anywhere in North Korea.

[The Garbage Disposal Unit]

No, it's not at all like that elsewhere. I can go into any country and I'll see people with extravagant hair/clothing styles. I'll also notice ideological symbols in people's clothing, such as communist or anarchist ones. Not so in North Korea, except the ones worshipping the Kim family and the state. Like I said, there's no evidence at all that there is even ANY written message which challenges the state or even any of its positions anywhere in North Korea.

Thank god for bourgeois liberalism. I can get a hammer and sickle t-shirt at the mall and wear it anywhere I want (well, not at work). Yup, as long as I stick to consuming symbols of rebellion, I sure am free. It's a thing I like to remind prisoners of in my letters to them.

Oh, yeah, while limited information is available, estimates put the DPRK's incarceration rate at roughly that of the United States.

For real tho:
Yes, North Korea is a despotic totalitarian hellhole. But even if people were allowed to walk around with purple liberty spikes and safety pins through their faces, they would still be facing needless starvation, drafted into the military, subject to the regulation of their daily activity on an unprecedented scale, etc.

The thing is, it doesn't (despite Juche) exist in isolation. It borders what is basically a permanent hostile American military encampment. It receives "aid" from the international community which it uses to secure the loyalty of the army and elites. Etc.

So, while, again, fuck North Korea - fuck treating North Korea as an exception.

[ℂᵒиѕẗяᵤкт]

To Magon,

It's not dramatic. It's just that this north Korea business has kind of opened up a huge can of worms in my head about what I believe and why.

People think I'm a goddamn libertarian or anarchist in real life when I talk about bureaucrats and how I describe government as a bunch of people being paid to have their heads up their asses, then they're shocked when I mention I'm pretty pro-Stalin or -Castro, at least in most respects.

So I'm trying to reconcile my "anarcho-Stalinism" into something more coherent.

[RedWorker]

I'm not sure to what degree you're being serious in that post, but:


Thank god for bourgeois liberalism. I can get a hammer and sickle t-shirt at the mall and wear it anywhere I want (well, not at work). Yup, as long as I stick to consuming symbols of rebellion, I sure am free. It's a thing I like to remind prisoners of in my letters to them.

Did I say that makes you free? It is the minimal, the most basic amount of freedom, and not even this is respected in North Korea because it is so authoritarian. Obviously the Western states are not ideal, in fact not good at all, in matters of freedom. But if this makes no difference, then go live in North Korea, after all if you stick to Pyongyang you won't experience malnourishment. And there are more workers' rights in the U.S. than North Korea: for example, you can strike and demonstrate, which are once again MINIMAL rights which doesn't make the state good, just not completely fucking terrible. You sound like a fascist whining about "bourgeois decadence" in "rebellious teenagers" brought about by "liberalism" to make people think they are "free" (they use these exact terms). You're not a fascist, but in this portion of your post you look as stupid as one. Obviously there's a big difference in freedom between being forced to wear pro-state symbols and having the freedom to wear symbols which challenge the state.


Oh, yeah, while limited information is available, estimates put the DPRK's incarceration rate at roughly that of the United States.

Here's a key difference: you can go to prison in North Korea for expressing disagreement with any position of the state, not so in the U.S. (though there might be political prisoners in the U.S., it is just not as extreme) And in the DPRK a major portion of the prison population is political crimes, whereas in the U.S. it's regular crimes. (a major part of regular crimes is caused by capitalism, sure) Obviously the U.S. isn't the panacea of freedom, but this kind of talk is just stupid. Trust me, you can argue that many aspects of the U.S. are similar to North Korea (which is true) without saying outright stupid things.

I never implied that freedom is the only problem in the DPRK.

[The Garbage Disposal Unit]

And in the DPRK a major portion of the prison population is political crimes, whereas in the U.S. it's regular crimes. (a major part of regular crimes is caused by capitalism, sure)

OK, that is some flimsy fucking shit right there. Like, can you actually flesh out that distinction in a way that isn't some liberal nonsense? Because I'm betting you can't. Usually it means "comprehensible as political within an established liberal notion of politics" and "bad proles hurting people".

On a related note, "regular crimes" in the U$ generally means "being part of an internal colony designated for slave labour".

[RedWorker]

Here's a re-wording: In North Korea there's a lot of people in jail for murder and for saying "I dislike Kim", whereas in the U.S. there's a lot of people in jail for murder, and yes, also for things which shouldn't be considered crimes, but nobody is being sent to jail for just saying "I dislike Obama". There is no real freedom in either of the states, but within the relative world scale now (with the bourgeois state and capitalist mode of production as standard) there is much more freedom in the U.S. than in North Korea.

[ℂᵒиѕẗяᵤкт]

To RedWorker,

But there are people in prison for saying they dislike war.

That's what "material support for terrorism" is in this country.

[Zanters]

I'm just gonna ask the same question as OP, but I didn't want to make a new thread.

I've had this problem before, what tendency am I? I have gone much further into the rabbit hole, but I still cannot say what I am.

I am a Marxist in the least.

I no longer believe in sioc

I like Lenin but not stalin.

I like Che's tactics too.

I do not support North Korea, or any other false socialist, capitalist states of the like.

I believe in a restricted vanguard.

I do not believe in reformism revisionism nor parliamentarism.

I'm not sure if I see socialism as a stage of to communism, or if it is communism in itself.

[Magón]

I'm just gonna ask the same question as OP, but I didn't want to make a new thread.

I've had this problem before, what tendency am I? I have gone much further into the rabbit hole, but I still cannot say what I am.

I am a Marxist in the least.

I no longer believe in sioc

I like Lenin but not stalin.

I like Che's tactics too.

I do not support North Korea, or any other false socialist, capitalist states of the like.

I believe in a restricted vanguard.

I do not believe in reformism revisionism nor parliamentarism.

I'm not sure if I see socialism as a stage of to communism, or if it is communism in itself.

Could just call yourself a Marxist. No need for anything fancy.

Although, you're aware that Che's "Focoism" never worked. At least, outside of the Cuban Revolution, and even then, it wasn't Focoism since said idea came out of said revolution, and never worked anywhere else.

[Zanters]

Ya, but he had some nice ideas. They could be applied differently. Maybe I just lean towards insurrection.

[MonsterMan]

OP sounds like Soviet Union style marxism to me

[Zanters]

OP sounds like Soviet Union style marxism to me

More like someone who is obsessed with the soviet union.

[The Disillusionist]

Naive authoritarian. Or trolling right-winger. Maybe just a Hobbes (as in, the guy who wrote Leviathan) fanboy. Who knows...

The nature of power is that people who have it will use it to oppress others. There is no such thing as "benevolence" or "malevolence" when talking about government, there is oppression and resistance, opportunity and lack of opportunity, exploitation and being exploited. Any

The Supreme Spoiled-brat in Chief, Commander Babyface of North Korea is a perfect example. He lives well, while the rest of his country suffers.

This will most likely irritate many of the non-anarchists of the site, but I believe that the greatest tragedy of Marx's Communism, and consequently of most varieties of Communism that were influenced by Marx, is that he refused to listen to the anarchists of his day, like Bakunin, who very clearly states that Marx's so called "Dictatorship of the Proletariat" would just lead to plain old dictatorship. Marx, like the arrogant asshole that he was (he had some amazing ideas, but he was a real jerk to people he disagreed with), tried to expel those people from the political realm of Communism. As a result, even though Marx didn't directly support totalitarianism, the stage was set for the creation of totalitarian regimes that would massacre and exploit millions of people.

As Bakunin said, "Freedom without socialism is privilege and injustice; socialism without freedom is slavery and brutality."