Shouldn’t the role be “advertised” to other people as well? Why is it following the Kim family line when that seems completely against ML thought?
In my view, it’s perfectly valid to criticize the fact that the Kim family has been in charge the whole time. However, I don’t think that’s at odds with having critical support for DPRK.
yeah I think disallowing immediate family (if not more) from holding public power is something every political system newer than “divine right of kings” should do. Hardly anyone whining about north korea gives a shit that the united states went bush - clinton - bush into another clinton being the presumptive candidate and our elections are probably less legitimate than the dprk.
something something royal family something something usual decadence, two of them.
Completely disallowing a public official’s family from holding public office is undemocratic. If people want a specific person elected to a certain position, why shouldn’t it be allowed because of their family?
This issue is resolved by making public office less of a privilege and more of a job, which as far as I know is what has happened over time in the DPRK.
you literally answered your own question lol
. It’s not undemocratic to protect the candidate pool from nepotism and privilege. even if it’s “just a job” you make social connections and have access to people and institutions that normal people don’t.
how many regular north koreans who weren’t the children of politicians are sent to foreign universities?
The leader of the SAC (formerly NDC) is the “leader” of the country, voted on by the SPA, which is elected by the people
It’s important to note that Americans also do not directly elect the president (that’s the Electoral College), and that most countries ~70 years into their democratic experiments were substantially less democratic than this.
Pretty much all the US leaders, whether political or economic, come from powerfully entrenched families, making the US a lineage-based feudal monarchy all but in name. This paragraph hits home:
Some Background: History conditions much of our thinking about our political systems and most Western democracies resemble Rome’s in 60 BC when, as Robin Daverman humorously says, three aristocrats–politician Julius Caesar, military hero Pompey and billionaire Crassus–formed a backroom alliance that dominated the elected senate. The oligarchs ensured that proletarii votes changed nothing and that the masses remained invisible unless they rioted or died in one of the elites’ endless civil wars. Two thousand years later, in Britain’s general election of 1784, the son of the First Earl of Chatham and Hester Grenville, sister of the previous Prime Minister George Grenville, and the son of the First Baron Holland and Lady Caroline Lennox, daughter of Second Duke of Richmond, offered voters offered a choice of dukes. Today, in many European countries (even egalitarian Sweden) ‘democracy’ is a mere veneer over powerful feudal aristocracies that still control their economies. American voters recently watched a former president’s wife competing with a former president’s brother being defeated by a billionaire who installed his daughter and son-in-law in important government positions and ensured that, as John Dewey said, “U.S. politics will remain the shadow cast on society by big business as long as power resides in business for private profit through private control of banking, land and industry, reinforced by command of the press and other means of propaganda”. Most Western politicians are related by marriage or wealth and have, like all hereditary classes, lost sympathy with the broad mass of their fellow citizens to the extent that, as American political scientists Martin Gilens and Benjamin Page found, ‘the preferences of the average American appear to have a near-zero, statistically non-significant impact upon public policy’: Testing Theories of American Politics: Elites, Interest Groups, and Average Citizens
Gonna show my dog brain here a bit but is there a visual somewhere that delineates this? I’ve never seen it put together in such detail. There was a nice infographic a while back floating around showing how chinas govt was put together and it was a really handy tool to deploy against libs
There was a graphic that went around for some time that compared all of Trump’s executive powers with the same powers that were distributed among DPRK leadership. Just with that one comparison it was clear how much more decentralized the responsibilities are within the DPRK. Wish I could find it for you.
Premier is the second top rank within the SPA, currently held by Kim Jae Ryong [not related].
In 2020 the premier changed to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kim_Tok-hun
There is no family line or monarchy. This is just false. People voted for them lmao, they can always change at any time but the people voted for this.
DPRK is a people’s democracy. Not a monarchy or whatever people like to claim. Kim Jun Un is a great leader and so were the other kim’s, they were all legitimately elected, they were voted because they are great leaders.
Lmao, you’re a joke. The voting process in DPRK is well documented if you actually look for real sources.
All men and women can only do one of 28 government-approved haircuts, 18 for women, 10 for men; other hairstyles are prohibited. North Korean leader Kim Jong Un introduced this law in 2013 and did not include his hairstyle on this list because he wanted to keep it unique and absolutely no one can dare to copy his hairstyle. It is assumed that married women should wear shorter haircuts than unmarried women.
Do you sincerely believe this shit? Like are you, Armen12, on this day on Lemmygrad, declaring to the world that you’ve abandoned all critical thinking and choose to live your life with the cognitive capacities of a lettuce slug from this day forward?
Nobody at the top level believes this crap lol. This is just gossip fodder for fashion magazines to print and remind people that the US and their made up state in the ROK are still at war with the DPRK and they need to keep up some war propaganda once in a while so that some day they can launch missiles at Korea and have people cheer for it.
You can legit go on wikipedia, type up DPRK and go from bluelink to bluelink down into obscure pages that the CIA hasn’t touched too much yet and learn about all the state figures in the DPRK that are not Kim Il Sung, Kim Jong Il or Kim Jong Un. All the state commissions, all the state positions and officials who’ve held those historically, shit you can even learn about the coalition that forms the Parliament composed of three parties including the WPK.
Do you actually believe that any country in the world would last for more than 10 years if they were this comically evil? The reason nobody at the top level in the west believes this shit is because they know how hard it is to manage macro stuff like, I don’t know, an entire country. In the feudal past this ended with revolutions, but there has been no such thing in the DPRK in over 70 years. Why is that? Could it be that you’re ignorant and should admit you know nothing but war propaganda about the DPRK? No, it must be the Koreans who are brainwashed and kept on a leash!
Maybe there’s a typo. This makes much more sense:
Kim Jong
Un introducedUnintroduced this law in 2013 …
Joking aside, this is, again, all projection. When I was in school… if you turned up with a shaved head you’d be sent home until it grew back. If you turned up with too long hair, you’d be sent home to get it cut. If you turned up with hair gel/hairspray or any other product, you’d be sent to the gym showers to wash it out. If you turned up with beads, braids, dreads, cornrows, a few too many bobbles or plaits, you’d be sent home to ‘fix it’.
I’m led to believe that schools are marginally less racist nowadays. I’m not convinced. Is France not, right now, going through another wave of Islamaphobia sending muslim girls home for wearing religious/cultural dress over their hair?
Now that I’m in work (and it’s been the same in every job), there’s a dress code, which includes hairstyles. It’s often unofficial. That doesn’t make a difference. If you turn up with anything you might call a ‘hairstyle’, you will be ostracised, bullied, and possibly lose your job. You won’t be given any public facing tasks, for a start.
I’ve not even touched on the shit faced by LGBTQAI2+ workers, for whom a ‘non-confirming’ hairstyle will be used as evidence of something if it suits bigoted, transphobic, racist colleagues and employers.
I just find it so mind boggling that liberals can live in the same world as me, put a quacky label on something that runs through every society in one form or another, and pretend it doesn’t exist under liberalism but does exist in a designated enemy country. And that it’s the worst thing ever. As if people in particular places and times don’t just wear similar hairstyles, because culture, fashion, religion, etc.
- Only government-approved haircuts
A YouTube link was detected in your comment. Here are links to the same video on Invidious, which is a YouTube frontend that protects your privacy:
Are you sure that a family have absolute authority over North Korea and that the Kim family were not simply figure head or influential people with limited power?
It’s not unusual for people from certain political families to simply stand out and hold a special place in a country’s politics. It’s a consequence of the immense popularity that a particular leader may have had during their tenure, which can end up rubbing off on those who have the same name. Assad is another example of this, and for the United states you have the Kennedys as well. India is another example, with the Ghandi family (no relation to THAT Ghandi) has had multiple generations of leaders voted in as prime minister or as opposition leaders.
The Bushes and Clintons are also an example in addition to the Kennedys; the Bush family has been manipulating Amerika into cryptofascist warhawkery since the end of World War 2.
Didn’t one of the bushes try to do a fascist coup even before WW2? I think the business plot was earlier
It was, as a matter of fact! That was 1933; the attempted installation of Smedley Butler.
Yeah it’s basically “What if the Kennedys had seen the US through a the complete destruction by bomb and rebuilding of the country”
I’d vote for em (in this hypothetical) 🤷♂️
I’d prolly also lambast anyone who decided they weren’t worth voting for as foolish. Much like term limit scaremongering, a lot of the sealioning about the Kim “dynasty” is predicated on a rather infantile understanding of democracy. Not that OP did or is doing this by asking in good faith.
