I mean, inheritance means that a family member takes over when the current ruler dies, and rules for the rest of their life (or until they abdicate).
That has happened twice in NK, and it’ll likely happen a third time, right?
The Bush Jr/Bush Sr thing is pretty messed up, but since neither sat for a lifetime, and Jr didn’t take over from Sr, I wouldn’t call it inheritance. Bad, but not inheritance.
I’m not an expert on DPRK history, so instead I’ll try and speak to the prominence of the Kims:
Think back to the enormous popularity the Kennedy family enjoyed in the US for decades. For a good thirty years, if you had a guy named Kennedy on your ticket, he was gonna win. Even Capcom, as recently as 2004, named their heroic American protagonist Leon S Kennedy, because the association of “Kennedy” with “Heroic/good/representative of America’s better angels” was strong in pop culture. It’s an incorrect association, but what matters is it existed.
But what did John, the one people remember most fondly, actually do to earn his reputation? Give a couple well-received speeches, have sex with a trafficked actress, propose a drawdown in Vietnam that never happened, and then get his shit blown smoove off? That’s not much of a legacy when you put it on paper, but here in America our standards are very low. with that in mind, let’s imagine a different history:
The Nazis win WW2. Doesn’t matter how, they just do. After cannibalizing Europe to rebuild their military, they cross the Atlantic with a massive fleet and start systematically dismantling the United Stated via carpet bombing. First electricity goes, then water, then food as every farm, dam and railway is destroyed. After all the infrastructure is gone they start leveling apartment blocks and houses, and entire towns are wiped off the map with few survivors every night. The bombers never stop coming, hitting even ruins where people might be hiding, scouring nearby forests with incendiaries, and allegedly (though I believe it) dropping viral and bacterial weapons with knowledge given to them by Japanese war criminals. Somewhere between one fifth and one quarter of the population is dead, starvation and disease are rampant, every single building has been leveled, and the traumatized survivors are hiding in caves. At this moment John F Kennedy shows up, leads the military in pushing the Nazis out of the northern states with help from Canada, and organizes the rebuilding of the liberated area. When the Nazis consolidate their hold on the southern states and create a military puppet government there to serve as a foothold for invasion, he oversees preparations to drive them back again. Obviously he becomes an instant folk hero, and his descendants both enjoy great political goodwill by association and experience great pressure to live up to the accomplishments of their fathers. //End hypothetical
In the US, a place that has not been touched by war in living memory, we very easily fall into the trap of thinking of other peoples as somehow sillier and more emotional, or more prone to irrational thinking. This is the message that our corporate media has always given us, through careful implication, picture choice, orientalist framing. The unspoken message is always: look at the latest inscrutable conflict these primitives have gotten themselves embroiled in now, aren’t you glad to live somewhere civilized where rule of law prevails?
Of course, the truth is that we export our instability: more than that, our stability depends on constantly destabilizing others and collapsing entire societies into nightmares from which can be easily siphoned cheap labor and resources. These aren’t random conflicts: almost always, they’re our conflicts, our proxy wars, our coups and propaganda drives. “Our” prosperity (mostly the prosperity of the capitalist class, but we do still get the crumbs) is inextricable from their suffering, it depends on it. If other societies are able to stand up for themselves, they can’t be threatened into extortionate “free trade” deals that let western corpos make an insane markup on some tv assembled with rare earth minerals from Vassal Country A by wage slaves in Vassal Country B. That sounds random but it has to be stressed that almost every supply chain for everything in the entire “first world” is built on that relationship, all the profitability of western companies is built on that relationship, and they have before and will again kill untold millions if that relationship is ever threatened.
To tie it all together, my thesis about the apparent popularity of the Kim family (and I say apparent because I can’t know for sure from outside the DPRK either way, but haven’t seen any signs of internal struggles, which you know our western press would pounce on) is this:
-The US and it’s co-belligerents visit an untold amount of conflict and misery on the global south as a matter of course
-Those who stand up to them are remembered fondly by their society, especially if they succeed, especially if they succeed and survive to old age
-Those who stand up are demonized in the western press, especially if they succeed, especially if they succeed and survive to old age
-The people we in the US are conditioned to view as lesser are if anything much more level headed on average than we are, and if the armageddon we made over there happened to us over here the result would probably look less like a socialist republic and more like a loose confederation of death cults
-With this in mind, and knowing that they aren’t actually central to the government of the country, I cannot possibly begrudge Korean society and the Korean state their affinity for the Kim family as a national symbol
They are not, but you seem unable to grasp this with your mental gymnastics.
How so? I am genuinely interested to be proven wrong, I’m just not seeing it. They’ve held dynastic control as general secretaries of the WPK have they not?
Just like you did with the Ukrainian Nazi symbol. Which you defended!
I have no interest in defending any Nazis, Ukrainian or otherwise. I just thought that post made a weak argument at a time when we need to be strong against the fascist uprising, and not look like we’re seeing SS symbols where they aren’t there. I’m happy to discuss that further.
How so? I am genuinely interested to be proven wrong, I’m just not seeing it. They’ve held dynastic control as general secretaries of the WPK have they not?
Cowbee has provided enough information to you for you to realize this, but you still ignore or twist it all in your fucked liberal mind.
and not look like we’re seeing SS symbols where they aren’t there. I’m happy to discuss that further.
See? You still deny the SS symbol. You even went like “that resembles the SS symbol” last time. Go back to reddit.
No need to be mean. I’m trying my best to understand the points you and Cowbee are making. Liberals blindly accept propaganda, I’m trying to think for myself here.
No you are not, you’re prodding and prodding while ignoring any and all points given until you get to one that seems even remotely flawed to you for you to hyperfocus on and criticize. Not honest at all.
I think it’s important to distinguish whether something is an SS symbol or something looks like an SS symbol. They may very well have done it on pupose for plausible deniability, but if we’re not precise in our language, we give ammunition to the enemy.
LITERALLY the SS symbol that you said was “blurry and looks like 44” like stop pretending.
As I understand it after the dissolution of the position of President, Kim Jong il and Kim Jong Un have held positions that are while important certainly not central such as General Secretary of the WPK. The Standing Committee of the Supreme People’s Assembly is the central state power and it’s members are elected by the Supreme People’s Assembly who are in turn elected through direct nationwide blind ballot.
The comparison I’m about to make isn’t 100% accurate but it’s close enough to make the point I hope. The British royal family theoretically due to their position swears in the pm and leads the country etc etc, whereas in reality it’s the parliament that is the actual central political power. The Kim family is habitually elected high positions like general secretary due to the legacy they hold but in reality most of their time is spent on more ceremonial work like inspecting new developments etc while the Supreme People’s Assembly is the actual central state power. Another similar analogy is the president of Ireland as I understand it signs the laws and swears in politicians but is generally a ceremonial role this analogy is probably more accurate as like the Kim’s it is an elected position however the general point remains.
Yeah that’s why I didn’t want to make that particular analogy because it appears to have whizzed over your head even when I included the end bit to try solidify the actual point at hand. The point is the roles they are elected to (which they are in stark contrast to a monarchy of any kind) are high ranking but not central to political power or work. Largely ceremonial and advisory.
because it appears to have whizzed over your head even when I included the end bit to try solidify the actual point at hand.
That user is intentionally doing it, the chain of questions was to eventually hyperfocus on any perceived flaw and ignore any or all points made before.
Kim Il Sung, Kim Jong Il, and Kim Jong Un have all held largely different positions. All have had high levels in the WPK and sometimes government, but each was elected into their positions. The Kim family has outsized influence due to being seen as heroic figures, this is not a “dynasty” but normal electoral politics surrounding popular figures.
Kim Il Sung, Kim Jong Il, and Kim Jong Un have all held largely different positions.
If we consider the title “Supreme Leader” to be understood as supreme leader of NK, they have all held that position, and only they have held that position. I know it’s been posthumous for the first two Kims, but it’s at least indicative. Has there been periods where the Kims have not had de facto power?
this is not a “dynasty” but normal electoral politics surrounding popular figures.
Hmm, normal? Are there many other examples of apparent inheritance of supreme leader titles for generations in electoral politics?
Sure, I just can’t come up with other places that has seen the same kind of elected dynasty, so I was hoping by “normal” you meant there were plenty of examples.
“Supreme Leader” is more of an honorific title, hence the posthumous designations.
I see. So the Kims have not been de facto leaders of DPRK for three generations?
There are plenty of other examples of family members of former leaders being elected. Happens all the time, but “dynasty” is only used against the DPRK. As far as being “de facto leaders,” they have held political power but not power over the entire system. The DPRK has a more distributed system of governance.
There are plenty of other examples of family members of former leaders being elected.
Sure, but among those examples DPRK is pretty extreme in its appearing like a dynasty, isn’t it? I at least don’t know any similarly extreme examples, but I’m happy to learn.
As far as being “de facto leaders,” they have held political power but not power over the entire system. The DPRK has a more distributed system of governance.
I’m not sure what you mean. Reading further it appears they’ve held dynastic control over WPK as general secretaries (as in only ever those three, each child taking over when the father died). Which is the only party to ever form a government. I realize they don’t control every single thing in DPRK personally of course, but it still looks a lot like a dynastic power regime.
I mean, inheritance means that a family member takes over when the current ruler dies, and rules for the rest of their life (or until they abdicate).
That has happened twice in NK, and it’ll likely happen a third time, right?
The Bush Jr/Bush Sr thing is pretty messed up, but since neither sat for a lifetime, and Jr didn’t take over from Sr, I wouldn’t call it inheritance. Bad, but not inheritance.
Stealing from @RiverRock@lemmy.ml
https://lemmy.ml/post/50962606/27092779
Removed by mod
They are not, but you seem unable to grasp this with your mental gymnastics. Just like you did with the Ukrainian Nazi symbol. Which you defended!
How so? I am genuinely interested to be proven wrong, I’m just not seeing it. They’ve held dynastic control as general secretaries of the WPK have they not?
I have no interest in defending any Nazis, Ukrainian or otherwise. I just thought that post made a weak argument at a time when we need to be strong against the fascist uprising, and not look like we’re seeing SS symbols where they aren’t there. I’m happy to discuss that further.
Cowbee has provided enough information to you for you to realize this, but you still ignore or twist it all in your fucked liberal mind.
See? You still deny the SS symbol. You even went like “that resembles the SS symbol” last time. Go back to reddit.
Just like all the libs who said Platners tattoo was a pirate symbol, LOL.
Libs: “Elon did the Nazi salute!”
ML: “Yeah, and Platner has a tattoo of the Totenkopf, an unmistakenly Nazi symbol of death”
Libs: “Okay now hold on a moment…”
Removed by mod
No you are not, you’re prodding and prodding while ignoring any and all points given until you get to one that seems even remotely flawed to you for you to hyperfocus on and criticize. Not honest at all.
LITERALLY the SS symbol that you said was “blurry and looks like 44” like stop pretending.
Removed by mod
As I understand it after the dissolution of the position of President, Kim Jong il and Kim Jong Un have held positions that are while important certainly not central such as General Secretary of the WPK. The Standing Committee of the Supreme People’s Assembly is the central state power and it’s members are elected by the Supreme People’s Assembly who are in turn elected through direct nationwide blind ballot.
Removed by mod
The comparison I’m about to make isn’t 100% accurate but it’s close enough to make the point I hope. The British royal family theoretically due to their position swears in the pm and leads the country etc etc, whereas in reality it’s the parliament that is the actual central political power. The Kim family is habitually elected high positions like general secretary due to the legacy they hold but in reality most of their time is spent on more ceremonial work like inspecting new developments etc while the Supreme People’s Assembly is the actual central state power. Another similar analogy is the president of Ireland as I understand it signs the laws and swears in politicians but is generally a ceremonial role this analogy is probably more accurate as like the Kim’s it is an elected position however the general point remains.
Removed by mod
Yeah that’s why I didn’t want to make that particular analogy because it appears to have whizzed over your head even when I included the end bit to try solidify the actual point at hand. The point is the roles they are elected to (which they are in stark contrast to a monarchy of any kind) are high ranking but not central to political power or work. Largely ceremonial and advisory.
That user is intentionally doing it, the chain of questions was to eventually hyperfocus on any perceived flaw and ignore any or all points made before.
Removed by mod
Kim Il Sung, Kim Jong Il, and Kim Jong Un have all held largely different positions. All have had high levels in the WPK and sometimes government, but each was elected into their positions. The Kim family has outsized influence due to being seen as heroic figures, this is not a “dynasty” but normal electoral politics surrounding popular figures.
If we consider the title “Supreme Leader” to be understood as supreme leader of NK, they have all held that position, and only they have held that position. I know it’s been posthumous for the first two Kims, but it’s at least indicative. Has there been periods where the Kims have not had de facto power?
Hmm, normal? Are there many other examples of apparent inheritance of supreme leader titles for generations in electoral politics?
“Supreme Leader” is more of an honorific title, hence the posthumous designations.
As far as being normal, the DPRK pretty much is. It’s not some alien dynasty, it’s a socialist country under siege.
Sure, I just can’t come up with other places that has seen the same kind of elected dynasty, so I was hoping by “normal” you meant there were plenty of examples.
I see. So the Kims have not been de facto leaders of DPRK for three generations?
There are plenty of other examples of family members of former leaders being elected. Happens all the time, but “dynasty” is only used against the DPRK. As far as being “de facto leaders,” they have held political power but not power over the entire system. The DPRK has a more distributed system of governance.
Sure, but among those examples DPRK is pretty extreme in its appearing like a dynasty, isn’t it? I at least don’t know any similarly extreme examples, but I’m happy to learn.
I’m not sure what you mean. Reading further it appears they’ve held dynastic control over WPK as general secretaries (as in only ever those three, each child taking over when the father died). Which is the only party to ever form a government. I realize they don’t control every single thing in DPRK personally of course, but it still looks a lot like a dynastic power regime.
The DPRK “appears to be a dynasty” because it’s presented that way in all major western media.
As for occupying high positions in the WPK, the WPK itself isn’t the government.
Removed by mod