Yep, excellent write-up! Korea, in general, has not had a “normal” year of development for well over a century and a half. From colonization to war to the present split, Korea’s conditions have been extremely tumultuous. Throughout all of it, though, has been a strong history of radicalism and resistance. Japan had a much more “normal” course of development, as it gained a head-start on industrialization and maintained it with colonization of the surrounding areas.

Yep! Lots of quirky bits like that that make sense when analyzing the development of the ROK.

The biggest eye-opener seems to be telling people that Sansung sells insurance, has luxury hotels like the Silla, etc. The ROK is a bit more “naked” in that sense, contradictions are more out in the open. Watching the Samsung Lions play the Lotte Giants, instead of the Yankees against the Dodgers, for example, puts it up in your face a bit more. However, you’re absolutely right that the US’ own megacorps are the ones at the top, and it isn’t just “big tech.”

Yep, though Japan’s own imperial history gives it a qualitatively different character to the ROK, which has largely been the history of a colonized country turned imperial vassal. The ROK still has domestic mass manufacturing, though it largely keeps it through suppressing wages. At least, that’s my present understanding. The ROK still has extreme anti-communism, but a stronger union movement, which of course isn’t sufficient but does signify a more millitant working class. The ROK in general is a pot constantly on the verge of boiling over, including in the social sphere with rising feminist movements.

Yep! I tend to do that more when talking about 재벌 IRL, as for many Statesians they don’t really know about them at all. One thing they all seem to understand immediately is that Samsung, LG, Hyundai, etc. are massive in the ROK and that the families at the top are thus the real rulers of the ROK. Also serves as a nice springboard to talk about where they came from, ie collaborators with the US and former Japanese colonialist government.

Yep, Japan has no working class movement and is thus entirely controlled by the far-right.

Japan oscillates between far-right politics exclusively, the working class has little organizing and struggle going on and the state is thoroughly controlled by private intetests. The Republic of Korea may be an example of a capitalist dictatorship controlled by 3 companies in a trench-coat, but has active labor struggles and a history of millitant unions, at least.

Thanks! 🫡

Platforms like Voat have disgustingly promoted fascist ideologies in the name of “free speech”, but that doesn’t excuse leading members of Lemmygrad, Hexbear, and Lemmy.ml from their persistent history of supporting Russia’s illegal invasion of Ukraine, supporting Chinese totalitarianism (not even true communism) over Taiwanese democracy, and disgusting transphobia.

1. These 3 instances support the people of Donetsk and Luhansk, which is the standard communist position globally.
2. The PRC is a socialist country, public ownership is the principle aspect of the economy and the working classes control the state. At a democratic level, local elections are direct, while higher levels are elected by lower rungs. At the top, constant opinion gathering and polling occurs, gathering public opinion, driving gradual change. This system is better elaborated on in Professor Roland Boer’s Socialism in Power: On the History and Theory of Socialist Governance. Taiwan, on the other hand, is largely controlled by capitalists, and despite their claims of being the rightful rulers of all of China, almost no countries recognize it over the PRC.

I don’t know what you mean by “true” communism.

3. All 3 of those instances are some of the most trans-positive and friendly instances on Lemmy. The views of Nutomic do not represent the views of the average user, this is confirmed by anyone spending any time in any of the 3 instances you listed. Communists are pro-LGBTQIA+.

For the sake of Lemmy’s growth, it’s problematic that join-lemmy.org (as an official platform) features Hexbear, Lemmygrad, and Lemmy.ml so prominently. While I dislike Reddit enough to have not tossed away Lemmy as a whole for its tankies and instead blocked those instances, featuring and recommending the use of extremist instances hurts Lemmy’s image (and Piefed and Mbin by association) in the eyes of potential users.

Speak for yourself, the fact that Lemmy offers leftist and communist instances is a big draw for a lot of users, myself included. They are prominent due to their size and activity, and recommending them for those who want them is good for growth. Further, for those that prefer not to be on leftist/communist instances, it’s good that the communists have a place to go to, rather than joining, say, Lemmy.world, which would be a poor fit and result in far more friction.

Sure, so in instances where socialism continues we can tell that it enjoys popular support. The soviet union dissolved, but we have billions living in socialism happily. I’m aware that one can say something and not mean it, but the fact that that’s possible does not mean that it’s always the case. You in particular never make any meaningful points, you cast a silly phrase or two and then act like everyone else is unreasonable.

Yep.

It’s really just theater, both uphold the interests of capital.

Oh duh, should’ve realized!

Pretty sure both parties are genocidal imperialists.

One party?

Centrism, as in what? The center of the Statesian political parties? Then yes, considering both parties are right-wing. The center of two arbitrary points? Depends on the points. “Centrism” is inherently an irrational way to describe political views, being in the center of two points adds no value. If someone says we should kill everyone with glasses, and someone else says we shouldn’t, we shouldn’t kill half of the people with glasses. What centrism does in practice is give people cover to obfuscate their actual views, it isn’t a position by itself.

Correct.

Good lord man. I’m not having a philosophical discussion about idealism and materialism.

But we are. We are specifically talking about ideology, how it relates to the PRC, and your own thought process.

I’m not religious and I don’t believe in the supernatural, if you need to know. I’m by training and engineer, physicist and mathematician.

And yet you use supernatural explanation by treating phenomena as unknowable, ie not a part of the material realm, and appeal to a vague “human spirit.”

I also don’t believe that any ideological system can approach perfection, and I’m pragmatic enough to understand that if you believe that, it is borderline delusional.

This is what I mean. You are appealing to the idea that no ideology can correctly understand the world and help us understand it better. Your own ideology is idealist.

I don’t think China has a perfect society and I expect I would not be happy there. I’m perfectly happy here with 3 kids, my pets, my wife (who owns a small business), a modest house and a family cottage, on a decent salaried job, in a country with a reasonable approximation of universal health care (I wish it were better), that makes attempts at regulating the excesses of capitalism with social programs and government oversight, that gives some freedoms in respect of rights, that values individual liberty and doesn’t get in your business on everything, that doesn’t overwhelmingly exert its will outside of its territory, that allows me to build a small consulting business and occasionally rent our cottage, that has a proud military history of which I have taken a small part, that is open to immigrants and ranks very high on multiculturalism and low on racism, that has enormous economic potential with one of the most educated populations in the world, that ranks highly in press freedom, democracy and economic mobility.

You live in an imperialist settler-colony as a well-off person married to a business owner. Your own class outlook is forcing you to see the world through a specific lense, and is pushing you towards idealism. You’re a labor aristocrat married to a petite bourgeois, and an occasional landlord.

My country has problems, but you’re not going to convince me that I’d be better off under a government like China, or a Marxist ideal, even if I thought it would be possible to change this country without enormous violent upheaval in which, very likely, members of my family or friends would suffer and die.

You probably wouldn’t be better off, personally, but the global south would be better off without Canada imperializing it of its surplus value and resources. Your class interest has made you hostile to working class, internationalist perspectives. This is your own, idealist philosophy.

And as I’ve tried to say since my very first words on this topic, you’re not going to convince me that a government organized according to Marxist thought will be - unlike every other human organization in history (that is, not ideal, but in practice and based on historical evidence and experience) - somehow a utopia that is incapable of oppressing people or attempting to exert its will on others who do not consent to it.

I have never said Marxists cannot oppress people, just that Marxism-Leninism is anti-imperialist, and that fighting imperialists is a good thing. Landlords, the bourgeoisie, etc would be oppressed by Marxist governments as their property is collectivized.

Having said all of that, my claims are clear. What is your objective in this discussion? Of what are you trying to convince me?

I suppose I am trying to convince you to become a class traitor and side with the working classes, or highlight for other working class folks the flaws in idealist thinking that you display.

The economic size and success of China means you should probably try to see why they do what they do. As for the book, no, idealism is the belief in supernatural explanations for phenomena, intentionally or not. It is opposed to materialism.

The 3 major assertions of idealism are as follows:

1. Idealism asserts that the material world is dependent on the spiritual.
2. Idealism asserts that spirit, or mind, or idea, can and does exist in separation from matter. (The most extreme form of this assertion is subjective idealism, which asserts that matter does not exist at all but is pure illusion.)
3. Idealism asserts that there exists a realm of the mysterious and unknowable, “above,” or “beyond,” or “behind” what can be ascertained and known by perception, experience, and science.

The 3 basic teachings of materialism as counterposed to idealism are:

1. Materialism teaches that the world is by its very nature material, that everything which exists comes into being on the basis of material causes, arises and develops in accordance with the laws of motion of matter.
2. Materialism teaches that matter is objective reality existing outside and independent of the mind; and that far from the mental existing in separation from the material, everything mental or spiritual is a product of material processes.
3. Materialism teaches that the world and its laws are fully knowable, and that while much may not be known there is nothing which is by nature unknowable.

When I called your arguments “idealist,” I meant it because of your habit of using “human nature,” or vibes, as a method of explanation, as well as treating phenomena as unknowable. When I linked Cornforth’s book (which I stole the 3 aspects of idealism and materialism from), it’s so you can study the reasoning behind the communist perspective and why it is different from past philosophies, and not subject to the same failings.

Further, I highly disagree with your take on China. It’s too vague to directly answer, though.