Just because the people come to a consensus on one leader does not make a country undemocratic. See pic related.
Democratic Juche
This is what the two-party electoral system does to you.
For what purpose
Also don't post twitter garbage here please
Juche-ists btfo
wtf is this real?
You have to actually check the consensus.
Um, Hitler was put in power by that incompetent fossil Hindenburg
What? Hindenburg appointed him chancellor on his own and not because of any election. Hitler had previously lost the presidential election against Hindenburg.
Cuba is a much, much, much better example of a leftist government ruled by democratic consensus.
...
what was it
This is retarded
correct
DPRK Is Democratic
Evidence:
* Zig Forums
* Official Site of The DPRK
* Some Youtube Video where you can See Someone Eating, so this Proves There's a Working Democracy
* all the counter-evidence is Actually Imperialist Propaganda
well some of it is.
I'm an anarchist and have no love for the DPRK, but its not as bad as its normally made out to be. I mean for fucks sake you'd think it was doing worse than the average monarchy the way people talk about it.
Its absolutely authoritarian and awful, but mainstream 'evidence' paints it like literal hell on earth where everyone is starving all the time and if you dont prefix 'kim jong ill' with 'comrade' and suffix with 'peace beupon him' you're shot dead on the spot.
un.
whoopsy
What is this? 1762?
it's obvious that mainstream propaganda on the country isn't neutral. but people who unironically think it's a functioning workers' democracy because of something on their government's site/kim's autobiography/… and think there's no repression are just as delusional
yeah. its still worth defending them against the ludicrous liberal propoganda, just like the USSR- but of course, not to the point of lying to yourself about what its actually like.
Agreed
I'll always defend it to some degree outside of Zig Forums when debating rightists
kornheiserembarrasing.jpg