Again, thought terminating cliche. why do you believe that to be the case? Have you read its constitution? Engaged in good faith with Conflicting defector accounts? Looked at past electoral data? Or Studied the country’s history to conclude why North Korean politics has taken the shape that it has?
Or, have you simply swallowed an orientalized view of a country on the other side of the world, without really questioning it?
Let’s address the elephant in the room here. You and I probably agree that the cult of personality around the Kim family in the DPRK is not conducive to a healthy political culture,and I would consider it a failure within the DPRK’s political project. I don’t think there’s anything controversial about that.
Why is there a cult of personality to begin with? If we look at charts of electoral results immediately preceding and following the Korean War, we see North Korea go from an incredibly vibrant, multi party, Socialist Republic, to a system where the Workers Party heavily dominates the legislative process. So this centralization in North Korean politics has a clear material origin.
But did you know that, in contrast to this centralization, the Kims have all held different positions in government? Did you know that those positions, on paper at least, get progressively more diffuse and less centralized as time has gone on?
Those facts alone don’t tell us everything about the DPRK’s politics. But it does lead us to consider why these two concurrent trends, the cult of personality and the diffusal of power, have are happening. Perhaps it points to factional divisions.
What I’m getting at is not that China, or the DPRK, or any other country on earth for that matter, is not some secret, perfect, democratic utopia. But that these places have political cultures and institutions that arise from history, and we can analyze them to see how and why they work (or sometimes don’t work). And that making sweeping generalizations based on aesthetic vibes isn’t helpful. We have to strive to actually understand the world if we want to meaningfully discuss it
Its not a sweeping generalization. Look i appreciate you actually putting some genuine well meaning into this reply. I really do. But calling something democratic, when it clearly isn’t doesn’t help anything except to push the narrative. I can call my fridge an oven , I can even show you were it gets hot. It doesn’t make my fridge an oven. With that being said, again, I appreciate this reply, but let’s be honest, this isn’t going anywhere. I wish you a good evening
Again, thought terminating cliche. why do you believe that to be the case? Have you read its constitution? Engaged in good faith with Conflicting defector accounts? Looked at past electoral data? Or Studied the country’s history to conclude why North Korean politics has taken the shape that it has?
Or, have you simply swallowed an orientalized view of a country on the other side of the world, without really questioning it?
Let’s address the elephant in the room here. You and I probably agree that the cult of personality around the Kim family in the DPRK is not conducive to a healthy political culture,and I would consider it a failure within the DPRK’s political project. I don’t think there’s anything controversial about that.
Why is there a cult of personality to begin with? If we look at charts of electoral results immediately preceding and following the Korean War, we see North Korea go from an incredibly vibrant, multi party, Socialist Republic, to a system where the Workers Party heavily dominates the legislative process. So this centralization in North Korean politics has a clear material origin.
But did you know that, in contrast to this centralization, the Kims have all held different positions in government? Did you know that those positions, on paper at least, get progressively more diffuse and less centralized as time has gone on?
Those facts alone don’t tell us everything about the DPRK’s politics. But it does lead us to consider why these two concurrent trends, the cult of personality and the diffusal of power, have are happening. Perhaps it points to factional divisions.
What I’m getting at is not that China, or the DPRK, or any other country on earth for that matter, is not some secret, perfect, democratic utopia. But that these places have political cultures and institutions that arise from history, and we can analyze them to see how and why they work (or sometimes don’t work). And that making sweeping generalizations based on aesthetic vibes isn’t helpful. We have to strive to actually understand the world if we want to meaningfully discuss it
Its not a sweeping generalization. Look i appreciate you actually putting some genuine well meaning into this reply. I really do. But calling something democratic, when it clearly isn’t doesn’t help anything except to push the narrative. I can call my fridge an oven , I can even show you were it gets hot. It doesn’t make my fridge an oven. With that being said, again, I appreciate this reply, but let’s be honest, this isn’t going anywhere. I wish you a good evening