More than two parties ✅ ❌
this post was submitted on 05 May 2025
0 points (NaN% liked)
Korea / 조선
550 readers
1 users here now
A community about anything related to Korea, such as news about the countries (DPRK and south), discussion, photos and videos, the language, etc.
See also: [email protected], which is intended for memes rather than serious discussion of these topics.
The picture of this Lemmy community is magnolia (목란), the national flower of the DPRK. The background picture is a scenery of Pyongyang.
Rules:
-
No imperialist apologia. The DPRK didn't start the war. US imperialist invasion was not justified. Neither are their army bases in south Korea. The sanctions were and are not justified.
-
Be respectful. The imperialist media likes to describe the DPRK people as completely brainwashed, and that it'd be fine to completely destroy that country in an invasion. Don't act like the imperialist media.
-
Be skeptical of your sources. Don't trust the media that has been known to report many falsehoods about Korea already. (You may still link to them if they write something interesting / worth reading, just be careful.)
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
Did you mix up the marks?
DPRK is more pluralistic than the USA, with 5 parties holding seats in parliament
Workers' Party (607) Social Democratic Party (50) Chondoist Chongu Party (22) Ch'ongryŏn (6) Independents (2)
DPRK is more pluralistic than the USA, with 5 parties holding seats in parliament
Oh, maybe. You got my meaning though
I love the use of alphabetization instead of literacy
It's the word used in French and maybe other languages. Probably a translation error.
no it means alphabetise, obviously the 0.1% not slphabetised was this list.
Houses are free and a human right
yeah but have you considered in USA i can choose where to live and pay 3k dollarinos in rents monthly 
yea didnt think so, commie
the US is being incredibly kind to korea actually. it hasnt bombed any of their houses since the war went cold. so basically, north koreans only enjoy free housing because of the US's commitment to freedom and democracy.
Free Elections: ✅ ❌
"Free" is one of the most abused words in the US lexicon. The US is, at best, "democracy for the rich" and the donor contributions you can find on how much billionaires spend on elections helps show that. The concept of it as free exists primarily in the imaginations of US people and in the myths pushed by the rich, so that people will blame themselves and other working class people for any problems*. The concept doesn't materialize when votes are suppressed, when rich donors spend more on a single election than you've ever seen or will see in your lifetime, when candidate choices are filtered through two parties thoroughly owned by such rich and corporate interests, when the electoral college and the supreme court hangs over any fading remnant of a notion that populist will could take control of the system from within, and so on.
*Incidentally, it's a common tactic in US propaganda for them to redirect blame to the working class and individuals more generally. Another example of this is the narratives that portray obesity as a kind of individual failing, while ignoring how pervasively unhealthy so much US food is or how for many people, the structure of transportation makes walking non-viable for getting places, and leaves you to sort out exercise as a side hobby.
So long as you believe in fictions like "free elections in the US", it's harder to understand how systemic so many issues are. But topple one and you might start to see how much like dominoes the narratives fall.
Except for felons in many states. And then Nixon and his strategists decide to make certain drugs felonies so they can disenfranchise specific segments of the population. And then it's revealed that this is what they did and why they did it. And it's never reversed.
https://nlihc.org/resource/history-voter-suppression
VOTER SUPPRESSION IS AN UNFORTUNATE BUT CONSISTENT FEATURE OF THE U.S. POLITICAL SYSTEM.
And that's the system you KNOW about. You don't know shit about the DPRK system so the idea that you could possibly compare them when you don't even have an accurate understanding of your own system is ridiculous.
I unironically don't really believe in democracy, so I don't mind bad elections so much. But I think you're basically saying there are some flaws with U.S.' elections. But the fact that nobody can predict the outcome of the next election though means in my books that it's pretty close to a free election. In contrast, I can with great certainty predict who will be in charge of NK next year, even though I don't know anything about their electoral system.
The real problem with U.S.' election system is that both parties suck.
Who's the current president in North Korea?
me
But the fact that nobody can predict the outcome of the next election though means in my books that it's pretty close to a free election.
We can and do predict with 100% accuracy that one of two candidates will win the US election. Both of those candidates represent essentially the same tiny minority of ultrawealthy donor-class elite. The fact that anyone falls for this obvious hoodwinking and thinks they have a "choice" or any say in who rules over them in the US still astounds me. Even when I was a lib I knew US elections were nothing more than a good-cop/bad-cop routine. Nah, we know exactly who will "win" the "free" election in the US every single time with zero deviation: the bourgeoisie.
load more comments
(2 replies)
But the fact that nobody can predict the outcome of the next election though means in my books that it’s pretty close to a free election. In contrast, I can with great certainty predict who will be in charge of NK next year, even though I don’t know anything about their electoral system.
Most likely you think that way because you're so used to the government not doing shit for you that you're in disbelief at the idea of people wanting to willingly elect the same person over and over.
No. I would think that in such a scenario, other parties should copy more and more from the winning party until (in the limit) they're indistinguishable. Of course, at some point before that, they'll get elected. This is IMO the reason why the democrats and republicans are so similar.
But why would they get elected in that scenario? When people in the US talk about elections and different candidate, they aren't going "I really like the incumbent party, but the other party is saying similar stuff and I'd like to give a shot to somebody who could be similar but hasn't proven themself." They are going "I don't like the incumbent and want different."
Admittedly, "hasn't proven themself" is quite a disadvantage. But not everyone cares about if they've proven themself if they are offering a change that matters to them.
Everyone has different ways they'd like the current party to change. This is why as another party approaches the incumbent's platform, some people will jump to vote for the new party. Some people are one-issue voters and if the ruling party wronged them then they will change their vote to the next best party no matter what.
Still, I can't argue with the idea that the incumbent party might be truly optimal and most everyone likes them. Seems implausible to me as a Canadian but you could be right. Nonetheless, you must surely agree a constantly changing ruling party in the U.S. ought to be sufficient proof of a (relatively) fair election.
load more comments
(1 replies)
You literally just said 4 vibes and nothing else.
load more comments
(1 replies)
how free was it when gore won the election but didn't become president?
so free to chose between two genocidal corporatists
load more comments
(1 replies)
Do you even know how elections in the DRPK work? No? Then you can not judge if they're free or not.
oh is that why over 80% of Americans want universal healthcare but it never happens?
In 2000, a judicial coup gave the presidency to George W Bush. Nothing has been done to stop the supreme court from doing so again. Not only are US elections not free or fair, nobody in power seems interested in making them so.
The 2024 election was the first one since 1976 without a Bush, Clinton or Biden in the running.
Mr. Clinton Bush-Kennedy would have been god-emperor of the US empire if he existed in the 2000s
And where did those "free" elections get you lol
More like, rigged elections: ✅ ❌
Why haven't American elections granted anything on this list?
because they're free. this is apparently a good thing.
free as in beer
load more comments
(2 replies)
Fucking shitpost. WTF.
While referring to your own comment as a shitpost is admirable, I'd urge you to commit to more constructive discussion in the future, rather than pointless exclamations upon achieving self-awareness.
load more comments
(6 replies)
Not really, its all factually true.
99.9% alphabetization
Yeah, that's got me baffled too. I tried a few searches, and all I was getting was results about how the DPRK and ROK differ in alphabetization
In several European languages, "alphabetism" is the term used for literacy.
I think it's a mistranslation of literacy rate.
English is most likely not their first language.
Yeah it is. I think they anglicized the German word. We have the same word in Dutch.
Ohh, that would make sense.
It would be funny if they were really talking about alphabetization and the whole country was lined up in order from A to Z.
getting married to jump the queue
New bit of anti-com propaganda dropping
Well not the whole country apparently