Can someone please explain how Juche is any different in theory and/or practice from left-wing Zionism...

Jason Unruhe pls go. we have your doxx.

The biggest difference between juche and all the ideologies you listed, OP, is that juche is in Korean.

maoistrebelnews.com/2015/09/25/first-vs-third-world-nationalism/

The nationalism of the oppressed isn't the same thing idiot.

it turns into the same thing the second the nation becomes economically powerful

north korea must take these extreme steps in order to resist imperialism. we can see what imperialists did to vietnam, africa, syria, iraq, libya.

too bad north korea's necessary tactics also make it a terrible place

OK, I'd really love to talk to Unruhe about this.

I was in Germany and Belgium last year when the whole refugee crisis began. I can honestly say, a huge reason for European Islamophobia isn't so much the idea that "brown people are parasites" but the idea that "backwards" Muslims are barbarians whose presence in progressive European nations will ultimately offset the decades of progress those European nations made in terms of equality, etc. For example, the reason why Euros hate the burqa has little to do with their disdain for brown people, but that the burqa is a garment associated with medievalist religious dogma and feudalistic oppression of women, which is thus a huge blow to the struggles of European feminists who fought against those kinds of systems. See what I mean?

I'm not saying xenophobia in Europe is a good thing, just that it doesn't necessarily grow out of a malicious place. I would liken it very much to what Chomsky said about the Tea Party: most of those people (white male working class) were people with legitimate grievances but whose false consciousness caused them to take it out on the wrong people. The same thing applies here.

Juche is a mix of Stalinism and Korean Confucianism with various changes made due to historical circumstances. End result is fairly bizarre.

[email protected]/* */ is anti imperialist though, and wasn't expansionist like Hitlerism was.

My god Jason's writing style is terrible. He needs an editor.

...

...

displays*, not admits

If the DPRK is so great, why do they shoot people for trying to leave their "paradise"?

...

They don't, it's capitalist propaganda. All the "witnesses" are paid by South Korea. The gulags/death camps don't exist either.

t. Jason.

Essentially rejects materialism in favour of basing ideology off of cultural and people based values and promotes self reliance. Calls itself socialist, but, is not marxist.

Juche - and all the other ideologies listed above - are deeply revisionist, because (as you said) all of them promote racialism and nationalism ahead of the communist project.

Juche's central tenant of national independence and self reliance is bretty good. DPRK's implementation of it with a dictatorship, not so good.

DEFEND THE NORTH KOREAN DEFORMED WORKERS STATE'S RIGHT TO NUCLEAR WEAPONS

Why are American commies such a joke?

There is literally private enterprise in North Korea. It's basically held together by a military junta and a welfare state.

That picture is from a British ICL group.

They're all CIA

AKA special economic zones.

DPRK started off as Stalinist but is now highly, highly revisionist.

So outright state capitalist to actual capitalist?

This is opportunism, not 'revisionism'. The North Korean communists ceased to be serious about the communist project in the '60s. It was red paraphernalia to legitimize a nationalism mimicking Japanese fascism ever since then (just like short after Stalin took over the reigns in Russia).

I would describe their "Stalinism" as hyper-industrialism and state-capitalist.

To be fair, the DPRK used to be heavily internationalist back in the day (recall how Kim Il Sung invited the Black Panthers into the country and showed quite a bit of solidarity with freedom fighters in Zimbabwe). Today it's straight-up fascist.

Was Gadaffi-ism fascist?

No. Post-Italian occupation it was just social democracy with a side of populism and pan-Africanism.

It was pretty well fascist/national-syndicalist.

I never considered him fascist.

Is there a kinda checkist for fascism? Like… what makes someone or something fascist? Are there multiple factors that have to be present, or a list of factors, any one of which means fascism? I mean I always thought fascism was like a totalitarian, warmongering government. Is there more to it than that?

I can't even begin to formulate a proper reply to such a retarded post.

I'm just gonna go ahead and invite myself over for a laugh riot and ask you how you came to that very interesting conclusion.

- ethno-nationalism
- a big Other (as infiltrator and ruiner of the stolen homogenous paradigm™)
- romanticization of historical aesthetics and military might

Check out Umberto Eco's 1995 article "Ur-Fascism".

nybooks.com/articles/1995/06/22/ur-fascism/

So in dum-dum talk,

Xenophobia
A unifying enemy
military fetishisation?

??

I don't think you can dum dum down 'ethno-nationalism' very much (maybe 'folk-racial fetishism'), and xenophobia is also more like that which forms the motivation /for/ ethno-nationalism instead of being synonymous with it.

Military /plus/ history fetishization, to be more precise.

It's unfair to accuse them of "military fetishisation" when the United States has all but openly declared it's intention to curb stomp the DPRK if it thinks it can win.

Ultranationalism, authoritarianism, anti-communism and militarism. If it has all these things then it's fascist. Racism and religion are optional. For example German fascism had a strong emphasis on racial hierarchy, whereas others did not (for example Mussolini didn't distinguish between Jews and non-Jews as long as you were Italian). Spanish fascism had strong religious elements, whereas others were secular, etc.