GenZedong

Okay I mean this sincerely, do you guys actually like the DPRK in its current form?

I’m not an expert, but while the original DPRK sounds like it was socialist and democratic, the current state ticks all the boxes for fascism right?

According to Wikipedia Fascism is “characterized by a dictatorial leader, centralized autocracy, militarism, forcible suppression of opposition, belief in a natural social hierarchy, subordination of individual interests for the perceived good of the nation or race, and strong regimentation of society and the economy.”

Firstly, Kim Jong Un is the supreme leader, so that ticks the dictator box, but more importantly it looks like Juche in its currently practiced form has become dynastic, requiring the supreme leader to be in the family of Kim Il Sung. So doesn’t that make the DPRK more of a monarchy than democracy?

There is definitely forcible suppression of opposition, and the point mentioned above is a “belief in natural social hierarchy.” Furthermore, the ideas of Juche are by their very nature of individualism a proponent of nationalism.

I get that “the subordination of individual interests for the perceived good of the nation.” Is not necessarily a bad thing and that is the belief of communism right? Like the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the one. So we can give that one a pass.

However, apart from that one item on the list, the rest of this seems like pure fascism. Hyper-militarized ethnostates fueled by nationalism and run by dictators are fascist regimes.

So my question is: why do some of you seem to support this?

I do mean that sincerely. I’m not an expert in this, so I really just want to know if I’m missing something or if people in this community are actually fine supporting fascism so long as it has a few socialist/communist ideas thrown in.

Personally it does feel kind of weird to do the latter. Like would you support a serial killer like Jefferey Dahmer just because you want to support gay people?

Perhaps that example is a little extreme but given the emphasis on nuclear weapons I found in my brief look into the ideologies of the DRPK, it could be just as extreme as that analogy.

Edit 1: Alright congratulations, you all have made me aware that my current understanding is limited and biased. Also rereading this comment made me realize it really does come off very pointedly and agressive so sorry about that and thank you to everyone who responded without being condescending.

Anyway if I’ve learned anything it’s that definitions are very important when using political terms and it is much more useful to describe specific elements rather than use umbrella terms with differing connotations.

I knew words had differing definitions, but I was not aware of how extreme the discrepancies between terms as they are defined by dictionaries and defined by Marxist-Leninists could be.

While I can’t say you’ve reversed my opinion, you’ve all made me realize I lack enough information to hold any meaningful opinion on this topic at all.

Anyway, the solution to ignorance is learning, so assuming I have time between school and work this week, I’ll be trying to read through the articles and watch the videos you’ve linked.

Also, I’ve downloaded “The State and Revolution” and I’ll try to read it on the train over the next week.

Maybe by the next one of these weekly discussions I’ll have some informed questions to ask lol

Edit 2: I am very surprised at how much I’m enjoying State and Revolution. I have ADHD that makes reading kind of daunting. But after getting about a third of the way through this book, I realized I was missing interesting things because I was having difficulty deciphering some complex sentences. So, because of how much I really want to learn everything in this text, I started over and am now highlighting and writing notes about basically every sentence lol

It was only during my first read, after I got to the part in like section 2 I think? I’ll get to it again eventually, but when he was talking about the police and military it finally clicked in my head that like holy shit the state really is just built to protect class and it really is impossible for the state to get rid of class because it is class. That’s when I started asking my own questions and shortly afterwards decided to restart.

Anyway, none of this really has anything to do with my original question, but as mentioned in my previous edit, that question was kind of nonsense.

I also wanted to say that I definitely get the emphasis on definitions here. This morning I realized the term “socialized medicine” kinda has jack shit to do with socialism defined by Marx and Lenin. This made me realize basically nothing I’ve ever heard called socialism was really socialism in any capacity. This discrepancy is exactly what Lenin describes with revolutionary thought being distorted to become innocuous to the state and used to “console” and pacify the working class. Shifts in definition are exactly how that happens.

For what it’s worth, the next time I hear someone refer to higher taxes or welfare programs as socialism, I will start a discussion about what socialism is.