North Korea isn't Marxist. It stopped being Marxist after the Soviet Union fell. They officially adopted a new ideology, that's more or less in line with what is traditionally considered Fascist. The North Korean regime is similar in function and ideology to other Fascist regimes like Belarus, Azerbaijan, or Turkmenistan.

[–] gun@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

None of those countries are fascist

[–] Gorilladrums@sh.itjust.works -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yes, they are lol

[–] gun@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago

Nuh uh

[–] OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

What books have you read on the economy of fascism and on the economy of the DPRK? Are you uninformed and wrong or misinformed and wrong?

[–] Gorilladrums@sh.itjust.works -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Fascism doesn't emphasize economics, it's a minor point in the ideology. Most Fascist governments allowed a private sector to run, but they also nationalized any industry they wanted on a whim. There were also a lot of nonsensical regulations, but as long corporations didn't question the state then they were fine. North Korea doesn't really have a private sector or an economy, but again the focus of Fascism is mostly political and social. North Korea functions similarly to other Fascist regimes. North Korea is authoritarian, ultranationalist, ultra militaristic, it's run by a dictatorial leader, it is centralized autocracy, the government does forcibly suppress opposition, the government does pump out propaganda telling its citizens that subordination of individual interests for the perceived good of the nation is a must, and so on. It's a Fascist state.

[–] OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Fascism doesn’t emphasize economics, it’s a minor point in the ideology.

Their rhetoric maybe. I've studied fascism, in depth. Fascism absolutely is primarily class warfare waged by the petite bourgeoisie and precarious haut bourgeoisie and has common economic characteristics. A good primer on this would be "Economy and Class structure of German Fascism" It is a quick read, <200 pages.

North Korea is authoritarian, ultranationalist, ultra militaristic, it’s run by a dictatorial leader, it is centralized autocracy, the government does forcibly suppress opposition, the government does pump out propaganda telling its citizens that subordination of individual interests for the perceived good of the nation is a must, and so on.

Are we just uncritically repeating the talking points of a country that killed 20 percent of Koreans in order to protect the puppet dictatorship riddled with former colonial Japanese oppressors they installed in the South? That claims the North invaded while their puppet dictatorship was busy slaughtering 10s of thousands of pro democracy protestors?

The DPRK literally has had workplace management elected by the workers since 1961 and you're accusing them of being undemocratic. Imagine how different your life would be if you chose your own management, and there was no owner to leech off of you.

[–] Gorilladrums@sh.itjust.works -3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Fascism absolutely is primarily class warfare waged by the petite bourgeoisie and precarious haut bourgeoisie and has common economic characteristics

I think you're missing the point. Fascism is neither capitalist or socialist. They just use whatever policies is convenient for the state at the time. If they deem a private sector is useful, they will allow a private sector. If they deem an industry is of national security, they will nationalize it. If they want to add or remove regulations on a whim, they will do so. There's no economic vision, there's no ideal economy that they work for. Class warfare is also used as a tool for power, it's not a defining part of the ideology. Fascism believes in social hierarchies, and this was just another way to enforce this idea. While Fascism's cousin ideology, Marxism, has class warfare as a definitive ideological enemy, this isn't the case for Fascism. When we look at North Korea, the country used to be mostly Marxist while the Soviet Union was still around, but they switched over to Fascism quickly afterwards. It doesn't seem like a lot changed because both ideologies are authoritarian, but Fascism is the more accurate term to describe how the country runs now.

Are we just uncritically repeating the talking points of a country that killed 20 percent of Koreans in order to protect the puppet dictatorship riddled with former colonial Japanese oppressors they installed in the South? That claims the North invaded while their puppet dictatorship was busy slaughtering 10s of thousands of pro democracy protestors?

And this is when you stop being a reasonable critic and start becoming a coping tankie clown. Just a few points here:

Everything that I said about how North Korea is unequivocally true and this is does not disprove or take away from that in any way, shape, or form.
America did not start the Korean war. The Korean war was officially started when the Soviet backed Marxist North launched a surprise invasion on the South on the 25th of June, 1950. This is basic history. Before that, most of the conflict was just political and there were a few minor clashes around the 39th parallel.
US helping the South defend itself from the North is beyond justified. It was the right call. On top of the North invading and slaughtering civilians in the South, the North also had other problems. After the war, both countries were relatively equal in population, size, and economy. However, there was one stark difference, North Korea was heavily dependent on the Soviet Union for its existence. They barely developed a plan B for when the Soviet Union cuts support. When that finally happened in the 1990s with the failure of Marxism in Europe and the collapse of the Soviet Union, North Korea was left with nothing and ended having a famine that killed 3.5 million North Koreans. The entire Korean war killed an estimated 2-3 million civilians on both sides just to put things in perspective. Even if South Korea didn't democratize in the 90s and remained under a dictatorship, they were still better off sovereign as that led them to escape the fate of the North. If the famine was spread to the South, the death toll could've been as high as 7 million. From that point on North Korea became a chronically malnourished, despite having the better geography.
North Korea was not and is not pro democracy, that's some low tier propaganda which even the most ignorant of people don't fall for. North Korea was a puppet propped by the Soviet Union, and the Soviets were very explicitly critical of democracy and saw it as a threat to their power, therefore North Korea was built with the same mindset.

The DPRK literally has had workplace management elected by the workers since 1961 and you're accusing them of being undemocratic. Imagine how different your life would be if you chose your own management, and there was no owner to leech off of you.

What's next, you're going to tell me that Kim Jung Un, his father, and grandfather all got 100% of the vote 100% of the time in free and fair elections? Listen, I understand you're a tankie and I commend your efforts to try and defend North Korea of all places, but this is not an argument you can win. North Korea is one of the world's most authoritarian and undemocratic countries in the world, and anybody can tell that this is objectively the case based on the information that North Korea itself publishes. North Korea isn't a communist utopia, it's the polar opposite.

[–] OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

You're super uneducated on what fascism is.

Please, share with me one nonfiction book or academic text you've read seriously analyzing fascism.

While Fascism’s cousin ideology, Marxism, has class warfare as a definitive ideological enemy, this isn’t the case for Fascism.

Bwahaha. If they're cousins then fascism and bourgeois democracy are inbred twins. Facism exists to defend capitalism.

Everything that I said about how North Korea is unequivocally true and this is does not disprove or take away from that in any way, shape, or form.

Claiming your claims are true doesn't make your claims true.

America did not start the Korean war. The Korean war was officially started when the Soviet backed Marxist North launched a surprise invasion on the South on the 25th of June, 1950. This is basic history. Before that, most of the conflict was just political and there were a few minor clashes around the 39th parallel.

To liberate the south, where the US had installed a far right puppet government which was slaughtering 10s of thousands of pro democracy protestors and generally repressing the population. Thats a war to liberate their country. Next you'll tell me that the US Civil War was an unprovoked invasion by the North.

US helping the South defend itself from the North is beyond justified. It was the right call. On top of the North invading and slaughtering civilians in the South, the North also had other problems. After the war, both countries were relatively equal in population, size, and economy. However, there was one stark difference, North Korea was heavily dependent on the Soviet Union for its existence. They barely developed a plan B for when the Soviet Union cuts support. When that finally happened in the 1990s with the failure of Marxism in Europe and the collapse of the Soviet Union, North Korea was left with nothing and ended having a famine that killed 3.5 million North Koreans. The entire Korean war killed an estimated 2-3 million civilians on both sides just to put things in perspective. Even if South Korea didn’t democratize in the 90s and remained under a dictatorship, they were still better off sovereign as that led them to escape the fate of the North. If the famine was spread to the South, the death toll could’ve been as high as 7 million. From that point on North Korea became a chronically malnourished, despite having the better geography.

The US literally mass murdered civilians and indiscriminately bombed civilian infrastructure. MacArthur had to have his nuclear command secretly taken away because the president thought he would nuke Korea.

The DPRK was literally doing better economically until the US massively subsidized the south in the 80s. You are right to criticize their uneven economic development though, though to be fair the sudden undemocratic dissolution of the USSR is only obvious in hindsight.

What’s next, you’re going to tell me that Kim Jung Un, his father, and grandfather all got 100% of the vote 100% of the time in free and fair elections?

You do understand that it isnt 100 percent, is is like 99 percent right? Which is reasonable in a country with process democracy where the final vote is confirmation that concensus has been reached.

Has it occurred to you that you're uneducated on alternate forms of democracy, and you've been shown something that is more democratic outside of its context within other democratic mechanisms and told that it is proof theyre a dictatorship?

Also, each Kim has had less and less positions within the executive branch, and Kim jung Un wouldn't have been elected if the guy before him didn't try to do a coup to take the country in a far right direction.

What’s next, you’re going to tell me that Kim Jung Un, his father, and grandfather all got 100% of the vote 100% of the time in free and fair elections?

You're literally claiming a campaign of genocide was justified because after the 80s the country it was in defense of stopped being an overt dictatorship, why should anyone value your analysis?