Why do authoritarian states have 'Democratic' or 'People's' in their names?
-
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?Probably for the same reasons you do not visit the forum, do not own slaves, and let women vote. You have a different understanding of democracy than the ancient Greeks. That is how it is with them too.
-
A revolution without a solid, detailed plan for how to actually run the country afterword is just teenage angst exercised at a larger scale.
"We're going to be a social anarchist commune!" does not count as a plan. It's an aspiration at best.
If there is no plan laid out, with strong community buy-in, then what always happens is that the "revolution" gets co-opted by someone to serve their own power-hungry ambitions.
They have a concept of a plan
-
Cause you expect the west hegemonic definition of democratic.
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?
-
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?Like Citizens United bringing the division and destruction
-
Leg of lamb is a dish where one serves a leg that comes from a lamb. The name does not claim that the entire body of the lamb is served.
Yes but when you say leg of lamb, most people don't give a shit which leg you're referring to.
There are multiple sets of states that are united under a single national government and are part of the American continents (Mexico and Brazil, for example) but only one of them claims to be THE United States of America.
-
"Of" being the operative part of the name. United States OF America. Derivative of the land name given by the European explorers. While it's incorrect to just say "America," you'd probably just be considered annoying if you went around reminding people or pretending not to get it.
Luckily I love being annoying.
-
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?
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.
-
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.
Unfortunately nuance has no place here, nor does the anti-colonialist context or distinction between party and governance.
-
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?Because it's funny
-
Cause you expect the west hegemonic definition of democratic.
Is there a competing definition of democratic?
-
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?The people are democratic.
The government, not so much.
-
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?"Neither democratic, nor the people's, nor a republic."
-
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?Can't believe you'd ask this question and leave out the People's Republic of China.
-
Same reason nazis put socialist in name but promptly killed off socialists and trade unions.
There was a point where the National Socialist Party was actually socialist. But Hitler and his ilk saw a party with popular momentum, joined it, co-opted it, and betrayed the socialist ideals.
-
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?So that absolute morons can say stuff like "the Nazis were socialist, it's right there in their name"
-
Yes but when you say leg of lamb, most people don't give a shit which leg you're referring to.
There are multiple sets of states that are united under a single national government and are part of the American continents (Mexico and Brazil, for example) but only one of them claims to be THE United States of America.
Was the USA the first set of "united states"?
-
Same reason the USA has 'United' in its name.
Unrelated. For many intents and purposes the states of the US are in fact united. However the examples in OP are very much not democratic.
-
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.
What does hegemony mean here? And what would a non-hegemonic democracy look like?
-
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?Because they're too cowardly to own what they are
-
What does hegemony mean here? And what would a non-hegemonic democracy look like?
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.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login