• Kusimulkku@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    4 months ago

    Can’t wait how they ensure democracy in North Korea next

    Objectively more democratic than the US.

    In Korea they vote for those directly.

    They certainly have an interesting method.

    Each candidate is preselected by the North Korean government and there is no option to write in a different name, meaning that voters may either submit the ballot unaltered as a “yes” vote or request a pen to cross out the name on the ballot.

    A person’s vote is not secret

    Uhhum.

    • AntiOutsideAktion@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      Wow you sure did copy and paste from a wikipedia article that doesn’t even bother to source the claim to any of the overtly state propaganda articles at the bottom of the page it uses as a bibliography.

      And you didn’t even bother mentioning where you got it so we’re 2 levels of lack of citations deep.

      Gee I wonder why leftists constantly criticize anti-communists for being intellectually lazy and dishonest…

      • Kusimulkku@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        4 months ago

        I mean I assumed (correctly) you’d figure it was from Wikipedia. How does the North Korean government describe their elections process?

          • Kusimulkku@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            4 months ago

            The organs of State power at all levels, from the county People’s Assembly to the Supreme People’s Assembly, are elected on the principle of universal, equal and direct suffrage by secret ballot

            It seems it is the secret ballot one that is conflict with the earlier quote. Do we know if they follow that principle, that their elections are what they say?

            There’s no excuse for you not being able or willing to find this yourself and yet being more than willing to spout off as you have.

            Laziness, really.

            • AntiOutsideAktion@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              4 months ago

              It seems it is the secret ballot one that is conflict with the earlier quote. Do we know if they follow that principle, that their elections are what they say?

              You can’t beg the question like this and blame it on laziness. You’re a deliberate bad faith actor.

              Who can we believe? The constitution that defines how that government works or a completely unattributed claim?

              • Kusimulkku@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                4 months ago

                I mean the US constitution has lots of fancy stuff in it that I’m not sure I take to be so in reality. So I’d definitely prefer if we had some sort of confirmation.

                • ZeroHora@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  Português
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  So if we don’t have confirmation is not true? But the article on wikipedia without confirmation must be true because is on the internet?

                  Why you doubt only what is not constructed in your mind?

                  • Kusimulkku@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    4 months ago

                    So if we don’t have confirmation is not true?

                    No, it’s just unconfirmed

                    But the article on wikipedia without confirmation must be true because is on the internet?

                    The constitution was online too though.

                    Why you doubt only what is not constructed in your mind?

                    I don’t know what you mean, could you rephrase this one?