What the hell is up with this? Why does the FinnshBolshevik consider DPRK a socialist state...

What the hell is up with this? Why does the FinnshBolshevik consider DPRK a socialist state? I don't see what is socialist about it. As the third comment shows, I thought the ML's only defended it in the name of what they see as "anti-imperialism".

inb4 "Western propaganda"

Yes, I know that there is much propaganda around it. Every political entity pushes its propaganda in order to serve its interests. Even if liberal propaganda-fed Western are completely fooled, I still fail to see where its socialism is. The question of whether life there is actually pleasant there or not is irrelevant to whether it is socialist, but I really think its absurd and embarrassing for TFB to suggest it is. Whatever NK is, that isn't supposed to be what we're aiming for. This state doesn't even compare to the USSR imo. At least the latter seemed to have actual socialist endeavors, etc.

What's going on Holla Forums?

He is part of a Marxist Leninist party.

I know it may be hard to accept but almost all humans, regardless of weather or not they are in your particular ideological camp or not, are retarded.

It's socialist by ML standards. State does not recognize private property, only does redistribution of goods which comes from the collective labor force of the entire working class. Just like in Stalin's USSR, there is still wage labor and commodity production, but without a market for exchange there is instead the state doing distribution according to need.

Because MLs are not marxists and not leninists.

Because he probably thinks that just because they say they are, it must be true.

bump

Because he's a Breznhevite tankie, it's the logical conclusion of ML's assumptions on what is socialism.

well gee wizz who saw that coming

Because there's production for need rather than for profit.
Because labour power can't be bought or sold.

The party ideology is fucked but the economic base is socialist.

It just really surprises me that he would even claim that.

Tankies gonna tank.

bump

Socialist or not, truly ghastly or not, DPRK is a burden for the relevant movement.

This is embarrassing

don't you know, everything the US doesn't like is socialism!

they don't even claim to be socialist anymore

Socialism == Prison, Gulag, Barracks for people like these. Any forced labour regime will suffice. No capital, right? And if you don't like international capital, we'll just establish an autarchy.

DPRK is socialist only insofar you put national in front of it, it's current propaganda is all about the purity of the Korean race.

It's not even some isolated "anti-imperialist" dictatorship of the nomenclature, it's very much tied into global finance and diamond trading. Why do you think Kim could go to a Swiss school?

When the state is practically run by the military alone, I don't think it counts as socialism tbh.

Even if the workers did legitimately control the means of production via the state, it doesn't change the fact it's a ethnocentric military dictatorship.

Obligatory webm

DPRK might have its roots in socialism but it's a state in war. It's been pushed into the condition it's in now, but the dynamic within it I doubt could be considered as any single type of economic system. It's not socialism, but it clinges to the ideology of it rhetorically.

I don't think you could analyse it as anything in particular. It's a war economy, a conflict state. The dynasty in control of it are as much the leaders of it as they are slaves to the figurehead symbol they represent.

Predominantly I'd imagine most of the actual power rests in the military tops, slightly below the figurehead, and a few rich snakes thoroughly infested by the ideas of the global capitalist elite and wealth. Not necessarily feudalism, not necessarily dictatorship, but a weird state which regardless of its own decisions can't ignore the enemies surrounding it nor the frozen (and yet still ongoing) civil war in which its opponent is backed by the contemporary ruling empire of the world.

Korea should be whole, and the US should get the fuck out of there. I would not, however, call the DPRK socialist, but I find it important to separate the critique of it from the imperialist propaganda.

It's an isolated state (isolated by the empire), kept in a constant conflict. What choices does it realistically have?

1. finnish faggot is not a bolshevik
2. he's a third worldist jason unroo tier piece of shit
3. the DPRK is socialist
4. anarkiddies are not
/thread

FB is not a third worldist in the same category as unruhe. What makes you say that?

there's no difference between those proto fascists promoting class collaboration of the "first world" by denying the revolutionary potential out of their own ideological impotence

What?

FB doesn't deny the revolutionary potential of the first world, Unruhe practically does. That's what separates Unruhe as a thirdworldist.

What are you on about? I don't understand.

i asked him, he did flat out call "first world" workers unfit for revolution and labled them "worker aristocracy"
he's unroo-ism in disguise

Well… that's shitty.
There's parts of FB I've thoroughly disagreed with, but if he even went that far instead of pointing out the corruption of the unions, but just blatantly calling "1st world socialists" et-al labor aristocracy, then I guess I agree with you.

Except about the DPRK being socialist.
They're a national state, in a state of perpetual war (not by their own doing, necessarily). I really don't think any "economic theory" can be applied to them, other than military control, personality cult (understandable, all nations have them to some extent (founding figures, etc)), and pretty much a continual corruption of the initial ideals whilst being perpetually forced into these scenarios by the ruling world empire.

I have sympathies for them, but that ruling structure is just (at best) a vanguard party in a war-communism state. Without the Soviet Union existing or some major polarity existing geopolitcally to global capitalism, it's hard to see how they'd be able to develop any differently.

fair enough