GenZedong

Sorry for my delay in your responce, I have been away from my computer.

In this context the 2 root sources for every or almost every claim on the DPRK starts from one of 2 places Radio Free Asia, and DPRK Defectors. I am going to start with RFA because the other will be a little more nuanced. With Radio Free Asia please see provided links coming from the Wilson Center, New York Times, and Declassified FOIAed documents from the CIA

As for DPRK Defectors, we have 3 issues here, the first one is the most obvious, this is a self selecting group that is far more likely than a standard population to harbor a grudge aganst the DPRK than would be a standard individual. There is a town in Brazil called Confederados who spreads similar things about the US, how it is Authoritarian and it stole there property ect ect, and while we could belive it at face value, if we look at who started it, people from the CSA who where mad there slaves where taken away we start to see context for a picture, weather you belive that it is a full lie, or if you belive it is a distortion of the facts based on their perception is up to you. We can also add into this issue 2 and 3 that come in conjunction, the DPRyK due to the repercutions of the still ongoing war, and the unprecidented sanctions imposed at the insistence of the United States, is cash poorer than the ROK, aswell as the economies are set up completly difrent, the DPRK is a command socialism, and that has kept them alive throughout the sanctions, while the ROK is a hyper Capitalistic Market economy on the imperal periphery being suported in no small part by the United States. This leaves defectors from the DPRK to be in a world of hurt, not to mention that the ROK routeenly deprives them of their right to return under international law, although some do get back. This leaves them both destitue and at the whim of either the ROK or USA, both having vested intrests in making the DPRK look worse than it is. If you look at the most popular defectors, like Yeonmi Park is a CIA asset, aswell as her story has changed wildly, and every time she tells it it only gets more outlandish. I would not call either of these, nor sources citing exclusivly these reliably by any strech of the imagination.

While yes language works by words carying meaning that is interchangable, and deffinitions are suposed to be descriptive not prescriptive, however not even deffinitions are without some source of bias, and it is important to look at where the deffinition is origionaly pulled from, and depending on the word where it comes from. The deffinition you provides boils down to "Scarry Athoritiarianism" and because athoritiarianism is already a badly defined term that can be applied to what ever enemy you have your deffinition does the same. Dictator, Militarism and Autocracy are all words that in common useage have become scarry words but loosely defined, Social Higherarchy does not apply in the strictest sense to the DPRK, however family dinamics, or willingness to follow laws could be construed as a social higherachy if I was working in bad or mixed faith. and Subordination of Individual Interests to those of the collective is just how society functions, at some level in any society I have to give up individual rights for that of the group.

I would say a better definition, even as just a working definition of Fascism, is the 8 points listed out by Luis Britto Garcia and published by the National Autonomous University of Mexico being as follows 1) Fascism is the absolute complicity between big capital and the State 2) Fascism denies the class struggle, but it is the armed arm of capital in it 3) Fascism summons the masses, but it is elitist 4)Fascism is racist 5) Fascism and capitalism have abhorrent faces that need masks 6) Fascism is blessed: Some religious groups typically support fascist movements, providing their blessing. 7)Fascism is misogynistic 8)Fascism is anti-intellectual, Each of these points have an expansion similar to point 6 but I did not feel like any of them were explicitly needed, howver this covers both its social and economic aspects and is an easy to test mechanism.

As for CIA safe places, I do not have a list of them, I can say are garenteed to not be CIA, and lots of what I would normaly use for quick refrence that are, are probably far to Marxist bent for it to be useful to propose, so what I do is I will over rabit whole each and every source I am given.

As for the topic that is at hand the 2 videos I would recomend on this is the haircut video and Loyal citizens of Pyongyang in Soul. I will admit the second video has a much bigger and more obvious bend to it, however I do think it is quite good