I mean if you're under feudal relations supporting capitalism makes you progressive, but right now we're operating under socialized production with capitalists constraining production around exchange value so yeah supporting maintaining capitalism is right wing. Let socialized production benefit society.
Hopefully Chinese democracy will prevail against western authoritarianism.
Authority exercised by the proletariat through a DotP is qualitatively different than authority exercised by capital through a DoC.
Read the analysis of the Paris commune in "State or Revolution".
I think just saying he killed his girlfriend isn't taken as "political" but I think killing your girlfriend and killing your girlfriend because she cheated are both actions with a political content
I'd just remove all detail of what she did, no matter how you phrase it it reads as potential justification. Those details don't matter.
I think you're getting hung up on an artificial separation of politics and economics, you should look up a critique of this or investigate why political economy is a useful framework for analysis.
Where is that video of the Chinese cop tearing milk company managers a new one for calling the police in response to workers staging a sit in as part of a labor dispute?
Bisexuals who bring the straight relationship paradigm into dating or the bedroom. (Not all or most bisexuals, but damn, certainly some)
It's mostly just really sad -men need to up their dating game, and a lot of straight sex expectations feel kinda rapey. Like girl it's not normal for your partner to choke you in the middle of sex without asking or prenegotiation and it is weird that you were disappointed that I didn't do that.
there is no way Biden or Harris would have approved the 20 point genocidal plan in the article.
Biden straight up gave arms and support to Israel over his tenure, including after October 7th when the genocide intensified. Biden also supported the genocide.
https://www.google.com/search?q=italy+operation+gladio
There are a few academic publications on this in the first page of Google search results
view more: next ›
Reposting the top comment of this thread which is really good: https://www.reddit.com/r/communism101/comments/ahvu9h/is_north_korea_a_hereditary_dictatorship/
The fact is that Kim Jong-Un, and his father, and his grandfather, do not and did not hold the highest positions of power in the government. The de facto head of state in the D.P.R.K is currently Kim Young-Nam, who has held this position since 1998. The current position of Kim Jong-Un is as you said, as he previously held the position of Chairman of the National Defense Commission, which was altered in 2016 to better reflect the situation at hand with better organisation. Kim Il-Sung held the positions of Premier and President of the Presidium for a long time, though he did retire from the latter in 1983, being succeeded by Yang Hyong-Sop; this is unsurprising, as Kim Il-Sung was a incredibly competent and well-respected leader, and especially so among his own people. The fact is, influential positions have become more decentralised with each generation, as the power of the state becomes more distributed among the proletariat and in accordance with society, in a rather natural way that may, hopefully, lead to a complete withering way of the state in future, as other aspects, too, decline, assuming a defeat of capitalist powers simultaneously with the existence of the D.P.R.K.
Allegedly, Kim Il-Sung did suggest Kim Jong-Il succeed him, because Jong-Il had been instilled with a revolutionary ideology for his entire life. The rest of the party and the people are said to have agreed with this - through their usual discussions, one would assume - and so, Kim Jong-Il succeeded his father in some positions, whilst others were removed, split up and redistributed, or reassigned. That is why there is no longer a President of the D.P.R.K: The position was no longer necessary, and equivalent powers were to be divided among multiple roles.
On your point of their democracy: The decision of whom is elected is not done so with the ballot. The voting is done through open discussions prior to the ballot, comparable to the Soviet design, which could also be seen in Libya to some degree. After a common consensus is met through these periods of discussion, the vote is cast as a confirmation of this selection, hence the lack of negative votes for candidates; democratic centralism requires unity, after all, and so does a socialist state. You can find many posts here that touch on the matter. I recommend this for some more information.
So, in short: The D.P.R.K is not a hereditary dictatorship, with power being decentralised through successive generations, and the election of officials are made through common consensus as decided by mass discussions.
Hopefully that helps.