Anonymous landtrust 2w

it’s not a people’s democracy either.

12

Anonymous #3 2w

It’s because they define themselves as explicitly being a country for that ethnicity and selectively grant citizenship based on ethnicity. Sure there’s countries who call themselves Vietnam and are mostly inhabited by the ethnicity Vietnamese but that’s different from having a policy of systematically trying to minimize the population of non-Viets and treating them as second class citizens.

14

Anonymous #2 2w

I think that can happen, which is why I wish countries didn’t have ethnically-based borders or weren’t named after their dominant ethnicity. But it’s not always as bad as Israel or a few of the other worst ones.

1

Anonymous #2 2w

i think other countries like japan do similar things. i guess in the american frame those kind of ideas/policies seem especially heinous but in the rest of the world its simply more normalized

0

Anonymous #3 2w

There are some comparisons to make to Japan (particularly with the severe racism, forced assimilation of minority dialects and languages, and war crime denial), but Israel is unusual in what it’s doing in the modern day. Japan, similar to Israel, genocided the Ainu and forcibly colonized much of Asia and the pacific. However few countries do this in the modern day.

4

Anonymous #2 2w

Define people’s democracy and how is it different from liberal democracy

-2

Anonymous #2 2w

The list of racist countries is large. The list of countries currently doing ethnic cleansing is smaller. The list of countries illegally settler colonizing occupied territory is very small. Israel, Turkey, Russia, Morocco, Azerbaijan, and a little bit by Armenia. Israel is not typical.

3

Anonymous landtrust 2w

Under a people’s democracy, the proletariat holds political power, and uses said power to dismantle capitalism and promote communism. North Korea possesses a stratified society with an inherited government and business elite class. A people’s democracy would not possess such, and especially not a hereditary monarchy.

11

Anonymous #2 2w

Well North Korea does not have a hereditary monarchy. Their leadership just votes that way because that’s how they see fit

0

Anonymous landtrust 2w

Yes it’s very normal and totally coincidental to be ruled by the same hereditary family that have their relatives assassinated to remove rival claimants. That’s not monarchical at all.

1

Anonymous #2 2w

And even if they are truly “elected” by the leadership, that’s not a democracy. Plenty of kings and tsars were elected by the nobility and boyars. But because said nobles are an elite class, it’s not actual democratic representation. The same applies for north Korea’s political elites.

1

Anonymous #3 2w

no, most countries in the world cannot be defined as ethnostates. you don't know what that word means

1

Anonymous #2 2w

So how is peoples democracy different from liberal democracy

1

Anonymous landtrust 2w

People’s democracy is primarily limited to the proletariat and is explicitly anti-capitalist in nature.

1

Anonymous #2 2w

That’s the beliefs of the people’s democracy for what they claim but in reality how is it different from liberal democracy?

1

Anonymous landtrust 2w

I frankly don’t know. I don’t know that people’s democracy has ever actually been successfully pursued given the tendency of revolutionary states to rapidly devolve into authoritarianism. The people who rose to the top in the revolution tend to cement their power and not relinquish it. I believe North Korea is one of the best examples of that, where such power has become so cemented as to be familiarly inherited.

1

Anonymous #2 2w

Right so of course a people’s democracy doesn’t make sense if it just appears to be authoritarian

1

Anonymous landtrust 2w

Yeah. What’s your point here? I assumed you were trying to argue that it’s not actually authoritarian by claiming it’s really a people’s democracy, as I have seen some people do before. I am not a communist, I myself do not believe in people’s democracy as an organizing principle, as you cannot ethically define people into specific “castes” and then only limit political power to those deemed “the proletariat.” It’s a theoretical idea which I doubt can be actually implemented.

1

Anonymous #2 2w

No I’m arguing that only a communist can understand what a true people’s democracy is. The liberal can’t make the distinction, he only just accuses it of being a fake democracy and the only real democracy is the liberal one

1

Anonymous landtrust 2w

I’m not a liberal. I’m a socialist. Just not a communist. Democracy can exist without capitalism. I think this is just a way to justify support for authoritarian regimes by saying “oh they claim to be communist, therefore they can’t possibly be authoritarian”

1