10
nK bAd!!! (lemmy.ml)
submitted 6 months ago by to c/memes@lemmy.ml
85 comments fedilink hide all child comments
🀑 1
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 15 points 6 months ago (64 children)

Do any genuine DPRK defenders have sources or statistics to help me break my brainwashing or whatever because all I have ever seen are reasons to oppose and people saying yeah but what if that's not actually true.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 64 child comments
    •
  • [–] 20 points 6 months ago* (7 children)
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 7 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (6 children)

    Thanks for the links. I'm curious if you see North Korea as an actual positive example of state governance or socialism, or if you simply mean to point out certain specific myths?

    The haircut video is an interesting demonstration of how state-run media spreads falsehoods, but overall it's really more of an indictment of America than a defense of North Korea. South Korea paying people makes sense, I never really gave defectors too much credence anyway. The interview is interesting but I wish it were longer and more in-depth.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 15 points 6 months ago (5 children)

    The DPRK is a success story, they succeeded in defeating both the Japanese and US imperialists (despite the US killing 1/5 of their citizens), fought the US comprador government to a standstill (which still serves as a US military base and carries out attacks and propaganda against the DPRK), and made it through the incredibly hard period of the 90s (the arduous march) after the fall of the USSR.

    Socialism can take on many forms, all of which can't be divorced from the historical context in which they arose. Other comrades can give some deep dives into the DPRK's governance system, which can show how it's far more democratic than the capitalist dictatorship in the south.

    We should all admire the DPRK for standing up to the US empire, and debunk the lies told about it first and foremost. Liberals tend to think its mordor or something, when in reality its a country where ppl go to work and live regular lives like any other.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 6 months ago (4 children)

    Point taken that they overcame adversity and that there is propaganda against them. To be fair, that can be said to varying degrees about a lot of countries.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 11 points 6 months ago (3 children)

    Everyone has reasons to do propaganda but if you're mostly exposed to western media then it's definitely a good idea to fact check everything they say about their geopolitical enemies, because they're always gonna be slandered to hell and even in countries with actual problematic leadership the idea isn't to uncritically defend them but just push back against narratives that will never serve the people in those countries regardless

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 6 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 child)

    What does good mean here? That's a very vague idea by which to classify entire societies, it would probably serve our understanding better to have more concrete criteria. For example, I would say the continued existence of the DPRK has had a net positive effect on the development of the global south: their development under seige has created a blueprint for other countries to examine, they counterbalance the power of imperial vassals in the region such as Japan, and the military deterrence they provide against US aggression has most likely saved a lot of lives.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 2 points 6 months ago

    Yeah good is a Rorschach word. I interpret it in the context of states as in broad alignment with whatever political values you hold. If geopolitical positioning is what you care about them sure they might be good.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
    • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [+] 12 points 6 months ago (12 children)
    [removed by mod]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
    •
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [+] 13 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (9 children)
    [removed by mod]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (8 children)

    Thanks.

    I'll have to read more about Korean Nationalism. As to poverty, you make fair points. As to universal conscription, I object to it in all circumstances regardless of wartime vs peace, as it is literally slavery. Other countries doing it doesn't make it better.

    As to Democracy, I am confused by the claim

    the DPRK is the only socialist country that has implemented direct elections at all levels

    When the source later says

    All of these mass organisations make up the Democratic Front...the potential nomination is debated and discussed at many mass meetings, and only then is the final candidate nominated for elections to the SPA.

    I fail to see the "direct election" in this process. It seems like a committee that theoretically takes into consideration debate and opinion but which then makes a unilateral nomination, who runs unopposed. Am I missing something?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [+] 10 points 6 months ago (5 children)
    [removed by mod]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [+] 9 points 6 months ago (4 children)
    [removed by mod]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [+] 7 points 6 months ago (3 children)
    [removed by mod]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 5 points 6 months ago (2 children)

    I fail to see the "direct election" in this process. It seems like a committee that theoretically takes into consideration debate and opinion but which then makes a unilateral nomination, who runs unopposed. Am I missing something?

    By direct election, what's meant is that all levels of government, from the local, to national level, are elected directly by the people.

    Contrast this with it's neighbor China, where local level positions are directly elected, but by the time you get to the national level, positions are elected, indirectly, by the directly elected representatives from the lower levels. The DPRK doesn't have that same sort of insulation at the national level.

    Candidates, meanwhile, are decided through mass meetings. This is a very loose comparison, but imagine something roughly akin to the caucus system in some USAmerican primary elections. But instead of boiling it down to two candidates, it gets boiled down to one. The final vote where you cast your ballot is essentially a ratification vote of that 'primary' process, where you vote "yes" or "no", but that doesn't mean the process which preceded it wasn't competitive.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 2 points 6 months ago

    It's a bit difficult to say how institutionally robust these meetings are, simply because the DPRK is so artificially closed off from the world.

    The Cuban electoral system works roughly similar, with direct elections at all levels of government, mass meetings narrowing down to one candidate, and ratification votes at the end of the process. And we have a much better window into how those work.

    Obviously that's a country on the other side of the world, so we can't just graft the Cuban experience onto the DPRK, but it can help us be more informed in our speculation

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
    • load more comments (1 reply)
    • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 10 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (43 children)

    if your attention span has been ruined by social media like mine is; madeline pendelton does short form videos that touches on it and she backs it up with a linktree full of sources and north korea seems to be her favorite topic. she's also on almost all of the social media platforms and you should be aware that her videos comment are mostly filled with hate from brainwashed people.

    she also does a twich channel where she goes over the current news and explains the propaganda in it; i watch it everyday.

    here's the most recent video of hers that i shared: https://www.tiktok.com/@madeline_pendleton/video/7610963982198770975

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 43 child comments
    •
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 11 points 6 months ago (22 children)

    Take, for example, the claim that North Koreans are permitted to leave the country.

    They absolutely are. I met more than one during my many years in university.

    betraying the State and escaping

    You very clearly misread this. It's a crime to commit treason and then escape. AND. "escaping" to another country is not a crime.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 22 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 6 months ago (21 children)

    Do you have a take on 2 and 3

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 21 child comments
    •
  • [–] 8 points 6 months ago (20 children)

    I know you didn't ask but 3 and 4 seem normal to me defecting during wartime and espionage are punished everywhere on Earth for a reason it makes them no better or worse than any other country.

    As for surrender I have a feeling it's a purposely unflattering translation whose real meaning is likely more inline with international norms such as

    Article 99 of the UCMJ

    Section 2 of the Armed Forces Act 2006

    Section 74 of the National Defence Act

    Section 15 of the Defence Force Discipline Act 1982

    Section 34 of the Army Act 1950

    and so on.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 20 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 6 months ago (19 children)

    Are you suggesting that these laws only apply during active service in the military?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 19 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 6 months ago (18 children)

    No that's not at all what I said.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 18 child comments
    •
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 5 points 6 months ago (16 children)

    Surrender specifically is a combatant concept (defecting and espionage are not), non-combatants don't surrender under military law, they migrate or seek asylum. E.g. to surrender you must be a combatant in this case an active service member.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 16 child comments
    •
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 6 points 6 months ago (14 children)

    Universal conscription doesn't mean what you seem to think it means. It's simply a mandatory service term, not permanent combatant status. Much like in the ROK, Thailand, etc., eligible citizens serve a set period then return to civilian life, they aren't subject to surrender laws before or after their term.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 14 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (13 children)

    I understand this but am not familiar with the specifics. In Israel, for example, I know people remain on reserve duty long past their conscription period.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 6 months ago (12 children)

    This isn't relevant anyway the fact is the laws you posted are seemingly entirely normal laws that are common around the world, and you were wrong that they aren't allowed to travel abroad by the government.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (11 children)

    How is that not relevant? If people are in reserve services presumably this law would apply to them.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 6 months ago (10 children)

    No reserves are not active combatants unless called upon just like in every country that has reservese (I can't think of one that doesn't). And even if it did the law itself as written is perfectly inline with international norms the fact they have universal conscription or a possible large reserve force doesn't change that.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 6 months ago (9 children)

    It looks like North Korean citizens enter service for ten years, and stay in reserve for another 30. Presumably we agree that this law prevents them from seeking asylum in South Korea until at least the end of that ten year period, which is pretty restrictive. I don't see any reason to believe it wouldn't also continue into the reserve period or even after, especially since the law is written as a law applying to "citizens" assuming the translation is correct.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 6 months ago (8 children)

    I don’t see any reason to believe it wouldn’t also continue into the reserve period or even after

    Because surrender has a specific meaning that requires the person in question be an active combatant. The law applies to citizens as it cover this but also espionage and defection which do not require this caveat.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 5 points 6 months ago (6 children)

    That's a disgustingly bad faith interpretation of what is said and is patently false. They have laws surrounding surrender that are inline with international norms same with defection and espionage none of these apply to leaving legally as you would know if you went to university in China plenty of non 30 year olds learning there. Citizens of the DPRK are permitted to travel by the government it's the UN sanctions stopping them travelling beyond China and Russia.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 4 points 6 months ago* (4 children)

    First off no. That was not the core question. You said:

    Take, for example, the claim that North Koreans are permitted to leave the country.

    The answer is yes they are permitted. Despite how you attempt to twist what the law says and what we were talking about to dodge this fact.

    Secondly obviously you can't move to a hostile power during wartime that's called defecting. No country on Earth currently or has ever allowed that.

    Are you trolling?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 4 points 6 months ago* (2 children)

    If you wish to continue to troll I think we should end this here. Citizens of the DPRK are allowed to travel (just not defect to a country they are at war with) what stops them is visa refusals due to UN sanctions. The US and USSR were never at war that's why it was the cold war. India and Pakistan have normalcy as core parts of their ceasefire terms from the most recent scuffle (which never did escalate to all our war). Funny you bring up Iran who the US never declared war on but do you know where they aren't allowed travel by the American government, the DPRK because they are at war with them. Please educate yourself and grow up trolling is unbecoming once you mature past 12.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
    • load more comments (1 reply)
    • load more comments (1 reply)
    • load more comments (1 reply)
    • load more comments (1 reply)
    • load more comments (1 reply)
    • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 7 points 6 months ago (4 children)

    if you look at the links in the video, you would see that several organizations; including the UN; has made up shit about north korea.

    also, it's bonkers that you would use the same organization that condemned iran for defending itself and has slow walked justice for the gaza genocides for decades.

    if you refuse to look beyond western sources, you're going to be stuck being brainwashed for the rest of your life.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 6 months ago (3 children)

    I am totally open to looking beyond western sources. Do you have a link to a non-western translation of North Korean criminal law?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 6 months ago* (2 children)

    it's in her linktree; the video says so.

    did you even watch the video? because it's starting to feel like you're being willfully ignorant here.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    Genuinely, I do not see that in her linktree. She links to this document for information about North Korea: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1fPJjTYGBo4QRuafFkbWTA8imbpr-QP3tD_946Yv_v3A/edit?tab=t.0

    I do not see a translation of North Korean criminal law in the document.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 4 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

    I think I found the original on https://www.unilaw.go.kr/bbs/selectBoardList.do?bbsId=BBSMSTR_000000000021&bbsSubId=008 (number 5 "ν˜•λ²•")

    While I meant to try and figure out translating it literally, it has turned out more difficult than I had hoped. So if any korean understanders would like to check it instead, here is the specific article:

    제63μ‘° (μ‘°κ΅­λ°˜μ—­μ£„)
    곡민이 쑰ꡭ을 λ°°λ°˜ν•˜κ³  λ‹€λ₯Έ λ‚˜λΌλ‘œ λ„λ§μ³€κ±°λ‚˜ νˆ¬ν•­, λ³€μ ˆν•˜μ˜€κ±°λ‚˜ 비밀을 λ„˜κ²¨μ€€κ²ƒκ³Ό 같은 μ‘°κ΅­λ°˜μ—­ν–‰μœ„λ₯Ό ν•œ κ²½μš°μ—λŠ” 5λ…„μ΄μƒμ˜ λ‘œλ™κ΅ν™”ν˜•μ— μ²˜ν•œλ‹€. 정상이 특히 무거운 κ²½μš°μ—λŠ” λ¬΄κΈ°λ‘œλ™κ΅ν™”ν˜• λ˜λŠ” μ‚¬ν˜• 및 μž¬μ‚°λͺ°μˆ˜ν˜•μ— μ²˜ν•œλ‹€.

    edit"곡민" meaning "citizen," suffixed with "이" probably marking the the noun as the subject.
    "μ‘°κ΅­" meaning "motherland," suffixed with "을" "indicates the future intention of the subject."
    "배반" means "betrayal, treachery, [or] treason," suffixed with "ν•˜κ³ " meaning "and" or "with."
    "λ‹€λ₯Έ" means "different, [or] other."
    "λ‚˜λΌ" means "country," suffixed with "둜" meaning "to, [or] toward."
    It is presumably "도망쳀거" although wiktionary does not contain such an entry. Wiktionary does have some entries starting with "도망" that all mean "to flee, to escape." Presumably suffixed with "λ‚˜" I think meaning "or"
    "νˆ¬ν•­" meaning "surrender"

    So a very literal translation might be something like "citizen(subject) motherland(to be done) betrayal-and other country-toward flee-or surrender" ... and then the rest which this is more effort than I can.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 3 points 6 months ago (11 children)

    leftists aren't racists; that's only liberals and conservatives.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
    •
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (7 children)

    google can't even find this xtian divine person; so post your source instead of baseless accusations, but don't bother if it's a carefully stitched, out-of-context talking points.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (6 children)

    I did spell it wrong, its xiandivyne but here is one of the response videos. His tiktok. Decide what you want, I know you will anyway. But if we allow racists who disingenuously represent black ppl to lead the conversations, we will keep getting more trumps instead of Harris's and the world will keep getting more fascistic and capitalistic.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (5 children)

    nothing in this video supports the racism allegation you're presenting here so that's the closest thing to disingenuous that's been displayed here so far.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 5 points 6 months ago

    Further supported by how Pendleton was one of those β€œleftists” who spent the whole 2024 election shitting on Harris, helping pave the way to Trump 2.

    I don't know or care about anyone else you mentioned to this point but this is fucking silly blueMAGA nonsense. Harris lost because she refused to distance herself from an active genocide and spent her entire run courting republicans and ignoring the left who then proceeded to not vote for the genocide enabler.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 6 months ago (2 children)

    that's the same video and leftists did not support kamala harris; liberals who called themselves leftists did.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
    • load more comments (1 reply)
    • load more comments (1 reply)
    • load more comments (3 replies)
    • load more comments (2 replies)
    • load more comments (-1 replies)