You’re right, sorry

Omg you linked my carrd that’s awesome

The leader of the SAC (formerly NDC) is the “leader” of the country, voted on by the SPA, which is elected by the people (SAC leader is also in WPK leadership as the CPC in China). This bias is attributed to the extreme conditions the dprk is under and the trust people have in the family.

Kim Jong Un is General Secretary of the Workers Party of Korea, and Chairman of the State Affairs Commission. These positions are elected by the WPK Party Congress and by the Supreme People’s Assembly respectively.

If Kim Jong Un didn’t wish to continue to hold his positions, one of the Vice-Chairpersons would take his place temporarily, and a successor would be discussed and elected at the next party conference, also likely a Vice-Chairperson.

For example, Kim Jong Il was elected into the Party Central Committee in the 70’s, and in 1974 was elected as the successor to Kim Il Sung. Jang Song-Thaek was elected to succeed Kim Jong Il, however, he wanted to reform certain areas, thus debate regarding his intentions and whether he was a revisionist or not ensued; the party then switched and had Kim Jong Un succeed Kim Jong Il.

Jang Song-Thaek then staged a coup in an attempt to consolidate power by force (confirming his intentions were not pure and that he was likely a revisionist in the intent of his “reform”). He was executed thereafter.

It’s important to mention Jang Song-Thaek to show that a successor to Chairman of the SAC doesn’t have to be a direct child of the former.

So, if Kim Jong Un were to retire, or wish to discontinue his positions, it would be somebody in the Politburo, or a Vice-Chairperson of the State Affairs Commission, to succeed him. However, there currently isn’t an elected successor appointed, because likely odds are that he isn’t retiring or dying in the near future.

All of Kim Jong Un’s roles within the DPRK are: Supreme Commander of the KPA, Chairman of the Central Military Commission of the WPK, General Secretary of the WPK, Chairman of the SAC, and Supreme Representative [as entailed in WPK leadership]

Kim Jong Un is not actually in total control of the DPRK; the Supreme People’s Assembly has, by far, the extreme majority of control over the latter. Kim Jong Un has never been in either the Supreme People’s Assembly or its respective Standing Committee. Premier is the second top rank within the SPA, currently held by Kim Jae Ryong [not related]. President of the Standing Committee (Presidium) is the top position within the SPA, a position held by Kim Yong-Nam [not related] until April 2019, where Choe Ryong-Hae thereafter was elected. That isn’t to say that Kim Jong Un holds no power within the DPRK, but anyone within the SPA certainly has more legislative authority.

Each person within the SPA, including Premier and Head of the Presidium, is elected (and thus their power is temporary and can be removed at any time). The closest thing to a dictatorship (so to speak) in the DPRK is the Dictatorship of the Proletariat, a determining class dictatorship of the majority which governs the state.

The only of the Kim family members (remember this is a common Korean surname, I am referring to the lineage of Kim Il Sung) to have an SPA position was Kim Il Sung, and he abolished his position. The “next in line” leader in the WPK is likely not to be a descendant of Kim Il Sung either.

I agree, face the wall

First one is a guy who ran as a democrat for some local position and had these self-righteous rants where they said liberals need to be “realistic” (and therefore basically republicans, and anyone campaigning for change beyond basically mirroring republicans is “crazy”).

Second is from this vid. They’re both emotes that just mean ”liberal.”

All these people saying we should just pay workers more, they don’t realise it’s part of a conveyor belt, if you start paying people more they’ll start expecting more pay every time work increases or you need them to work longer hours or travel further for their job.

Si

In any event, the US didn’t need an excuse to join the war. Germany was giving us plenty already.

When the US declared war on Japan in response to the attack on Pearl Harbor, it did not declare war on Germany; Germany declared war on the US three days after the US declared war on Japan. The U.S. was the ideological predecessor to Nazism [1] [2], and only joined the war when they were threatened.

Uphold the Communist Party of China and Marxism-Leninism-MZT; Amerikkka inspired Nazism and will, like its child, die in a bunker with a gun to its head

Read up on colorism

They’re the type of socialism (social democracy) that I approve of.

Social democracy is not socialism, it is social-fascism, class collaboration leeching off the wealth of the global south like a settler vampire from the hill of the imperialism. Look at how social democratic settlers treat immigrants, or minorities/natives. You fundamentally do not understand what socialism is.

And no offense, but you have no fucking idea what the the PRC is doing. You know nothing about their government structure, how policy is carried out, or the way the system functions at all. I guarantee you could not name the tiers of government, or even three government officials without looking it up. Your ignorance is shown right away by the fact that you say “CCP” (Chinese Communist Party) when the correct acronym is “CPC” (Communist Party of China). This is such a simple mistake that proves you have not read any media outside of the west regarding China.

Says something incorrect Gets well cited rebuttal “Omg I won cuz I made you mad”

see above

Person who thinks they can refute video evidence, the admissions of student leaders and a western correspondent, and the private admissions of the US government.

Shut the fuck up, you’re literally the only other person who posts on here, I’m not exposing you in a 2 month old thread. Your racism will be on the front page.

sorry, racism isn’t good

Cognitive dissonance 🥱

Ugh horrible argument. No, you have to contend with the source I provided, not skip it and provide a different source, especially when the prolewiki page is a challenge to the Wikipedia page, and so citing the latter is like citing a work against which a polemic is directed at the polemic as an “alternative.”

Apparently Wikipedia is “not biased”, they just forbid certain sources, include U.S. government aligned sources by and large (this article you’ve cited sources Radio Free Europe, a CIA propaganda outlet; the New York Times summaries of situations in countries the U.S. is opposed to (this is done 10x), despite the source being a rubber stamp for the U.S. government; a Washington Post opinion article which completely obfuscates the nature of the press as a tool of class rule), and so on. Sorry, Wikipedia is biased.

We’re out of the echochamber, prove anything I said in this post wrong. You can’t do it!

Ugh garbage one-liner. Refute what I have to say or shut the fuck up 🥱

“Getting you mad”, no it’s actually fun to refute everything you have to say and see no attempt at a rebuttal. Keep squirming.

You did the @ wrong lmao