The fact that you’ve ingested years of anti-dprk yeonmi park level slop, that you think anyone must be crazy to support them, and it’s some kind of a 3d chess pro-dprk psyop, is a level of propaganda I’ve never seen.

When all of us were asking: who’s dumb enough to believe these propagandized racist caracatures? You were thinking, yes all of its true, and anyone who questions this must be a psyop.

It’s like the someone told you older women are all baby-eating witches, and now you think it’s actually a plot when someone doesn’t demonize them with equal severity.

What on earth are you talking about. Operation gladio was a cold-war program to demonize and destroy leftist / communist formations, just as the US has consistently done against the DPRK and against countless other anti-imperialist projects in the 20th century.

The CIA did so many dirty tricks against the DPRK during the special period, and committed countless atrocities against them.

How are you people twisting your brains around to think that support for targets of the US empire is somehow a US program??? This isn’t complicated.

I’m not exactly sure what the question is, but if its that “power always corrupts”, this might be true for capitalist countries, which allow private ownership of capital, and creates a system that encourages and incentivizes accumulation of power.

But In a socialist state, where the heights of the economy are controlled not by private capitalist dictators, but by collective decision-making, and production decisions are controlled at the collective political level, then no one person can accumulate that much power, and they would be (and are) punished when they try to subvert the collective authority.

Taking the example of police, the important question is who commands them, and for whose benefit? In proletarian states, police are commanded not by capitalists who use them to protect their private property, but by the socialist state who commands them to protect the people. Socialist states are going to be receptive to accusations of abuses, because that means they’re harming the people.

That’s a key distinction between proletarian cops and capitalist ones.

China is not moving away from communism. I don’t know what you’re referring to with tesla, but tesla has almost no sales in the PRC, and is considered a laughing stock. They stopped presenting at electric car shows in the PRC years ago because they’re too far behind.

Is China State Capitalist?

• The backbone of the economy is state ownership and socialist planning. 24 / 25 of the top revenue companies are state-owned and planned. 70% of the top 500 companies are State-owned. 1, 2 The largest bank, construction, electricity, and energy companies in the world, are CPC controlled entities, subject to the 5 year plans laid out by the central committee.
• Workplace democracy in action in the CPC.
• Is modern day china communist? Is it staying true to communist values?
• Didn’t China go Capitalist with Deng Xiaoping? Didn’t it liberalize its economy? Is China’s drastic decrease in poverty a result of the increase in free market capitalist policies?
• Is the CPC committed to communism?
• The Long Game and Its Contradictions. Audiobook
• The myth of Chinese state capitalism. Did Deng really betray Chinese socialism?
• Tsinghua University- Is Socialism with Chinese Characteristics real socialism, or is it state Capitalism?
• Isn’t China revisionist for having a capitalist sector of the economy, and working with capitalists? Why isn’t it fully planned like the USSR was?
• Castro on why both China and Vietnam are socialist countries.
• Roderic Day - China has billionaires.
• What is socialism with Chinese characteristics (SWCC)?
• How is SWCC not revisionist? How is it any different from Gorbachev’s market reforms?, 2
• Domenico Losurdo - is China state capitalist?, 2
• Did Lenin say anything about Market Socialism, or productivism?
• Vijay Prashad - Is China capitalist?
• Why do Chinese billionaires keep ending up in prison? Why are many billionaires and CEOs going missing? China sentences Ex-Chairman of a major bank, guilty of embezzling ~$100M USD, to death in 2019.
• China cracks down on billionaires - Ben Norton interviews Ian Goodrum
• Do capitalists control the communist party? No, pic
• How the State runs business in China.

China, Cuba, Vietnam. The first two have a higher life expectancy than the US, the richest country in world history.

From here

Once the proletarian state possesses political power and controls the means of production, it will “wither away” over time as it suppresses the bourgeoisie and moves toward a classless society. While the state must exist while class distinctions remain, it becomes superfluous in a classless society. The use of force is no longer necessary to suppress class antagonisms, because there are no classes. Lenin includes a long quote from Engels to explain this phenomenon, a portion of which is sampled below:

As soon as there is no longer any social class to be held in subjection, as soon as class rule, and the individual struggle for existence based upon the present anarchy in production, with the collisions and excesses arising from this struggle, are removed, nothing more remains to be held in subjection — nothing necessitating a special coercive force, a state. The first act by which the state really comes forward as the representative of the whole of society — the taking possession of the means of production in the name of society — is also its last independent act as a state. State interference in social relations becomes, in one domain after another, superfluous, and then dies down of itself. The government of persons is replaced by the administration of things, and by the conduct of processes of production. The state is not ‘abolished’. It withers away. This gives the measure of the value of the phrase ‘a free people’s state’, both as to its justifiable use for a long time from an agitational point of view, and as to its ultimate scientific insufficiency; and also of the so-called anarchists’ demand that the state be abolished overnight.” (From Anti-Düring)

If you agree with the premises behind this argument, the conclusion must follow. If the state arises from class antagonisms in society and exists for the purpose of class suppression, it must therefore exist while there are classes (even during a proletarian revolution!) and start to die off once class is abolished. Engels’ description, “the government of persons is replaced by the administration of things, and by the conduct of processes of production,” explains the change in the nature of the State very well. Lenin points out that under the dictatorship of the proletariat, the State is no longer “the State” proper, but a different kind of institution altogether.

Thank you for your service

No problem, thx!

I def recommend reading about the US’s many campaigns historically to accuse their enemies of doing the thing they themselves are guilty of. A few good ones off the top of my head are Paul Williams - Operation Gladio and William Blum - Killing Hope

Off the top of my head (and without researching this further) simple things like minimum wage increases have happened, and while it took alot of fighting, that is accomplished by voting.

Minimum wage, the 5-day work week, and other workers gains took decades of violent struggle and organizing by socialists, communists, and anarchists in nearly every country.

My point is that the rulers of a city or town might not be capitalists.

That’s not how it works in any capitalist country. Political power is subservient to economic power, and is toothless without it.

np

You might have to use one of the archive.today mirrors. A lot of ISPs block them for some reason.

Homophobia / sexualized violence. Banned.

I apologize for being too combative… it just gets exhausting for us to debunk the same points over and over again, especially since the US has a near total monopoly on anglophone media sources.

We should oppose actual genocide, like the one Israel is carrying out on the Palestinian people with US help, not fake ones like the “white genocide” or “uyghur genocide” which are employed against perceived enemies of the white/western world.

Even locally, it would take some incredible magic for the capitalists who rule a given city or town’s politics, to enact or enforce laws than go against their interests / profits, especially without a fight. Scale isn’t relevant here, since local elites use the city/town police as goons to protect their property.

Unless you can give some examples, I don’t believe it, and I certainly can’t think of any time in my city’s history where they’ve willingly allowed something against their interests.

The entire “authoritarian” vs “anti-authoritarian” distinction doesn’t correspond to reality, and isn’t real. There is no history of any human society, that doesn’t make rules, norms, and customs for their group, and enforce them.

“Authoritarianism”, just like “Totalitarianism”, are only used to demonize workers and working-class movements who dared to construct systems existing outside of capitalist authority. Even the historical anarchist experiments found that they needed to enforce rules if they didn’t want to deconstruct within days, and were also labelled as “authoritarian” by opponents to their left and right.

there is always a chance, no matter how small, that it will make things better.

Read my comment below, because it gets into this. It can’t make things better, because it historically has never done so, only protests with the threat of violence from below (and completely outside of bourgeios democracy) have.

Losurdo calls this period (From ww1 - ww2), the Second Thirty-Years War, because war and pogroms never really halted in eastern europe after ww1.

Some more context for anyone wandering over from an anti-communist / pro-capitalist space:

Socialists view democracy under capitalism to be impossible. Most current-day systems are better labeled as Bourgeois Democracy, or democracy for the rich only, which socialists contrast with proletarian democracy. Under capitalism, political parties, representatives, infrastructure, and the media are controlled by capitalists, who place restrictions on the choices given to workers, limit their representative options to vetted capitalist puppets, and limit the scope of public debate to pro-capitalist views.

Bourgeois democracies are in reality Capitalist Dictatorships, resulting in legislation favorable to the wealthy, regardless of the population’s actual preferences. The Princeton Study, conducted in the US in 2014, found that the preferences of the average US citizen exert a near-zero influence on legislation, making the US system of elections and campaigning little more than political theater. Multi-party, Parliamentary / representative democracy has proven to be the safest shell for capitalist rule, regardless of voting methods or differing political structures, for countries as diverse as Australia, Japan, Sweden, the UK, the US, South Korea, or Brazil.

Ancient Greek philosophers like Plato and Aristotle more accurately defined Democracy as rule by the poor, and they considered states based on elections to be anti-democratic Aristocracies, since only the wealthy and ruling families have the resources to finance elections. They contrasted this with random selection / sortition, and citizen’s assemblies, as being the defining features of democracy, both of which are non-existent in the countries listed above. Today, liberal / parliamentary “democracies” are dominated by wealthy candidates, and entrenched political families, with Capitalists standing above political power.

This system of sham elections acts as a distracting theatre piece, giving the illusion of democracy, whilst in reality it serves to platform capitalist views, make them appear more popular than they are, and manufacture consent for the system itself.

Some more resources:

• Red Phoenix - Pacifism - How to do the enemy’s job for them. Youtube Audiobook
• Halim Alrah - Why liberal democracies are a sham.
• What about social democracy / democratic socialism / the Nordic model? Isn’t Sweden socialist?
• On the unraveling of the Nordic welfare states: increasing inequality and forced austerity.
• Scandinavia’s covert role in western imperialism
• Why can’t you acheive socialism through voting in our current democracies?
• Paul Cockshott - On Socialism and Democracy. 2 3
• Comrade Hakim - Why electoralism always fails.
• Why not just vote leftists into office: what’s wrong with democratic socialism?

Authoritarian checklist:

• You want to exist outside of US domination and control.
• End of list

100%. Its about identifying with “the team”, and declaring your allegience to the US system, not about substantive democracy.