207
Why do authoritarian states have 'Democratic' or 'People's' in their names? (thelemmy.club)
submitted 5 hours ago by to c/asklemmy@lemmy.world
71 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Many countries include 'Democratic' or 'People's' in their names, even though they are not democratic and do not serve their people. Examples: Democratic People's Republic of Korea Lao People's Democratic Republic People's Democratic Republic of Algeria Democratic Republic of the Congo And German Democratic Republic (East Side) in 1949–1990. None of these states are democratic, power and wealth are concentrated in the hands of a small ruling elite. Who are they fooling with these names?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 1 point 4 hours ago (2 children)

In the West we've been getting 50/50 splits on voting, whereas out east it's all 99/sent for re-education. Which of these seems more hegemonic to you?

Edit @+2hrs & change: At time of edit, the votes I see on my response here are 6/5, which is pretty close to 50/50. I can't tell whether that's been deliberately engineered by naysayers or the most juicy of ironies. Either way. Bravo. That's hilarious.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 2 hours ago

    In the West we’ve been getting 50/50 splits on voting

    Close elections are a fairly meaningless metric, especially when all candidates agree on certain key issues.

    whereas out east

    "Out east?" Where? There's tons of different countries with all kinds of different governments in what's classically considered the East. There isn't even a Comintern to generalize about, but it doesn't seem to slow you down at all.

    Have you actually studied the government structure of, say, Laos? I doubt it. So, where did you get this information you're confidently repeating about it? Mind-boggling how liberals will just say shit. Lazy stereotyping at best.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 4 hours ago (2 children)

    Elections≠Democracy. Again, you are expecting liberal west (or hegemonic) "democracy". I am not making a moral judgement of either, just trying to explain that the definition of democracy that has been shoved to the people's brain of the global north (hegemony) is not the only or the correct one.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 hours ago (1 child)

    What does hegemony mean here? And what would a non-hegemonic democracy look like?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 2 hours ago (1 child)

    I mean it in Gramsci's terms. For the second question I would say the ones cited by OP are good examples but horizontal organization is my preferred one, look about EZLN ways of horizontal democracy. Again not saying they are the correct or morally good ones either.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 hour ago

    the ones cited by OP are good examples

    How is North Korea a democracy?

    EZLN ways of horizontal democracy

    These seem to be distributed communities that internally use direct democracy (public assemblies). And I agree that direct democracy is a form of democracy. A very inefficient form that doesn't scale past the size of Greece or EZLN, but still a democracy.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent