He definitely is elected, just not directly. The Chinese President is elected by The National People’s Congress. The Presidium, which is the body that presides over the NPC when the full body Is not in session, nominates one or more candidates, and then the whole NPC deliberates and votes
North Korea has a nominally more direct electoral system than China, though it’s equivalent to the Chinese President is the President of the State Affairs Commission, which Kim Jong-Un holds.
These are head of state positions which, while influential, are more insulated from the day-to-day operations of governance.
That said, we have a much better window into what Chinese political culture is like, as well as the robustness of its institutions, as compared to the DPRK. So it’s more difficult to say, one way or the other, what the DPRK’s politics are truly like.
That said, these thought terminating cliche’s don’t help you or anyone else. Its worthwhile to learn how these systems work.
Also, Indirect elections aren’t inherently bad. The prime minister of the UK is also indirectly elected, but that fact alone tells us very little about the UK’s political culture, institutional responsiveness to the popular will, or how able institutions of governance are able to weather crises
I said there are elections. People go vote for their representatives. Whether that electoral process is effective, or those representatives truly representative of their constituents is a different question which we lack good information on. This isn’t hard to grasp
Again, thought terminating cliche. why do you believe that to be the case? Have you read its constitution? Engaged in good faith with Conflicting defector accounts? Looked at past electoral data? Or Studied the country’s history to conclude why North Korean politics has taken the shape that it has?
Or, have you simply swallowed an orientalized view of a country on the other side of the world, without really questioning it?
Let’s address the elephant in the room here. You and I probably agree that the cult of personality around the Kim family in the DPRK is not conducive to a healthy political culture,and I would consider it a failure within the DPRK’s political project. I don’t think there’s anything controversial about that.
Why is there a cult of personality to begin with? If we look at charts of electoral results immediately preceding and following the Korean War, we see North Korea go from an incredibly vibrant, multi party, Socialist Republic, to a system where the Workers Party heavily dominates the legislative process. So this centralization in North Korean politics has a clear material origin.
But did you know that, in contrast to this centralization, the Kims have all held different positions in government? Did you know that those positions, on paper at least, get progressively more diffuse and less centralized as time has gone on?
Those facts alone don’t tell us everything about the DPRK’s politics. But it does lead us to consider why these two concurrent trends, the cult of personality and the diffusal of power, have are happening. Perhaps it points to factional divisions.
What I’m getting at is not that China, or the DPRK, or any other country on earth for that matter, is not some secret, perfect, democratic utopia. But that these places have political cultures and institutions that arise from history, and we can analyze them to see how and why they work (or sometimes don’t work). And that making sweeping generalizations based on aesthetic vibes isn’t helpful. We have to strive to actually understand the world if we want to meaningfully discuss it
Its not a sweeping generalization. Look i appreciate you actually putting some genuine well meaning into this reply. I really do. But calling something democratic, when it clearly isn’t doesn’t help anything except to push the narrative. I can call my fridge an oven , I can even show you were it gets hot. It doesn’t make my fridge an oven. With that being said, again, I appreciate this reply, but let’s be honest, this isn’t going anywhere. I wish you a good evening
You really should know how silly this makes you look, even to someone sharing your judgement of how democratic those processes are in NK or China. They’re just explaining how things work in the political systems of those countries objectively.
If you’re from the US - someone can explain to you how the electoral college works without making a judgement on whether or not that’s democratic or not. If you’re not from the US, many democratic systems have such mechanics like indirect appointments or indirect voting, whether good or bad.
Objective knowledge gives you the power to form better opinions and take action, including for those systems of power that you are a part of. Rejecting such knowledge unconditionally because it’s about a country you don’t like (or anything you don’t like) is incredibly self defeating in the long term. It makes you easy to manipulate.
You say that, but you also claimed out of nowhere that they said NK holds fair elections. Which they clearly didn’t. So if you aren’t misunderstanding what they’re trying to tell you - why are you putting words into their mouth and being combative?
He definitely is elected, just not directly. The Chinese President is elected by The National People’s Congress. The Presidium, which is the body that presides over the NPC when the full body Is not in session, nominates one or more candidates, and then the whole NPC deliberates and votes
Sure he is “elected” just like in north korea
North Korea has a nominally more direct electoral system than China, though it’s equivalent to the Chinese President is the President of the State Affairs Commission, which Kim Jong-Un holds.
These are head of state positions which, while influential, are more insulated from the day-to-day operations of governance.
That said, we have a much better window into what Chinese political culture is like, as well as the robustness of its institutions, as compared to the DPRK. So it’s more difficult to say, one way or the other, what the DPRK’s politics are truly like.
That said, these thought terminating cliche’s don’t help you or anyone else. Its worthwhile to learn how these systems work.
Also, Indirect elections aren’t inherently bad. The prime minister of the UK is also indirectly elected, but that fact alone tells us very little about the UK’s political culture, institutional responsiveness to the popular will, or how able institutions of governance are able to weather crises
You unironically are saying there are legit elections in NK. Oh boy, you are a hoot
I said there are elections. People go vote for their representatives. Whether that electoral process is effective, or those representatives truly representative of their constituents is a different question which we lack good information on. This isn’t hard to grasp
What isn’t hard to grasp is that NK isn’t democratic, and sham elections dont count
Again, thought terminating cliche. why do you believe that to be the case? Have you read its constitution? Engaged in good faith with Conflicting defector accounts? Looked at past electoral data? Or Studied the country’s history to conclude why North Korean politics has taken the shape that it has?
Or, have you simply swallowed an orientalized view of a country on the other side of the world, without really questioning it?
Let’s address the elephant in the room here. You and I probably agree that the cult of personality around the Kim family in the DPRK is not conducive to a healthy political culture,and I would consider it a failure within the DPRK’s political project. I don’t think there’s anything controversial about that.
Why is there a cult of personality to begin with? If we look at charts of electoral results immediately preceding and following the Korean War, we see North Korea go from an incredibly vibrant, multi party, Socialist Republic, to a system where the Workers Party heavily dominates the legislative process. So this centralization in North Korean politics has a clear material origin.
But did you know that, in contrast to this centralization, the Kims have all held different positions in government? Did you know that those positions, on paper at least, get progressively more diffuse and less centralized as time has gone on?
Those facts alone don’t tell us everything about the DPRK’s politics. But it does lead us to consider why these two concurrent trends, the cult of personality and the diffusal of power, have are happening. Perhaps it points to factional divisions.
What I’m getting at is not that China, or the DPRK, or any other country on earth for that matter, is not some secret, perfect, democratic utopia. But that these places have political cultures and institutions that arise from history, and we can analyze them to see how and why they work (or sometimes don’t work). And that making sweeping generalizations based on aesthetic vibes isn’t helpful. We have to strive to actually understand the world if we want to meaningfully discuss it
Its not a sweeping generalization. Look i appreciate you actually putting some genuine well meaning into this reply. I really do. But calling something democratic, when it clearly isn’t doesn’t help anything except to push the narrative. I can call my fridge an oven , I can even show you were it gets hot. It doesn’t make my fridge an oven. With that being said, again, I appreciate this reply, but let’s be honest, this isn’t going anywhere. I wish you a good evening
You really should know how silly this makes you look, even to someone sharing your judgement of how democratic those processes are in NK or China. They’re just explaining how things work in the political systems of those countries objectively.
If you’re from the US - someone can explain to you how the electoral college works without making a judgement on whether or not that’s democratic or not. If you’re not from the US, many democratic systems have such mechanics like indirect appointments or indirect voting, whether good or bad.
Objective knowledge gives you the power to form better opinions and take action, including for those systems of power that you are a part of. Rejecting such knowledge unconditionally because it’s about a country you don’t like (or anything you don’t like) is incredibly self defeating in the long term. It makes you easy to manipulate.
Look i know how these countries operate. Saying they do “x” doesn’t mean it to be true. Its not hard to understand
You say that, but you also claimed out of nowhere that they said NK holds fair elections. Which they clearly didn’t. So if you aren’t misunderstanding what they’re trying to tell you - why are you putting words into their mouth and being combative?