Shouldn’t the role be “advertised” to other people as well? Why is it following the Kim family line when that seems completely against ML thought?
Shouldn’t the role be “advertised” to other people as well? Why is it following the Kim family line when that seems completely against ML thought?
In my view, it’s perfectly valid to criticize the fact that the Kim family has been in charge the whole time. However, I don’t think that’s at odds with having critical support for DPRK.
I couldn’t agree more, I’m not a fan of lifetime leaders or nepotism, but their contributions to a better Korea are admirable and inspiring
By a better Korea do you mean powering cars with wood chips and charcoal and dying of malnutrition at 40?
Do you know how internal combustion engines work?
Are you aware of racial/ethic differences in life expectancy in western countries?
Source?
https://apnews.com/article/d9d824f29b3b4128977e60117c2a11e0
"UNITED NATIONS (AP) — An estimated 11 million people in North Korea — over 43 percent of the population — are undernourished and “chronic food insecurity and malnutrition is widespread,” according to a U.N. report issued Wednesday.
"The report by Tapan Mishra, the head of the U.N. office in North Korea, said that “widespread undernutrition threatens an entire generation of children, with one in five children stunted due to chronic undernutrition.”
A “better Korea” means starving half the population to death and having 1-in-5 children with stunted growth I guess?
yeah I think disallowing immediate family (if not more) from holding public power is something every political system newer than “divine right of kings” should do. Hardly anyone whining about north korea gives a shit that the united states went bush - clinton - bush into another clinton being the presumptive candidate and our elections are probably less legitimate than the dprk.
something something royal family something something usual decadence, two of them.
Completely disallowing a public official’s family from holding public office is undemocratic. If people want a specific person elected to a certain position, why shouldn’t it be allowed because of their family?
This issue is resolved by making public office less of a privilege and more of a job, which as far as I know is what has happened over time in the DPRK.
you literally answered your own question lol
. It’s not undemocratic to protect the candidate pool from nepotism and privilege. even if it’s “just a job” you make social connections and have access to people and institutions that normal people don’t.
how many regular north koreans who weren’t the children of politicians are sent to foreign universities?
I still think it’s possible to have representatives who don’t necessarily amass wealth and privilege. If the problem is that politicians are distinct from normal people to the point of having this kind of privilege to share with their family, then restrict the amount of privilege afforded to them. Make them into more normal people.
I think maybe we’re coming to a problem that exists in representative states in general.
Being family with the politicians in power is already a kind of privilege, people from outside will want connections with the family relatives. Smooth promotions/contracts ect.
Politics as a career should be the thing to get rid off.
Yeah… Our commie party has the same views