World News
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
view the rest of the comments
North Korea's biggest sin is surviving a genocidial war against them by the US, the West simply cannot forgive such transgressions.
Jesus Robert Christ, what other amazing historical tidbits do you have rattling around up there? This is fascinating as hell!
I suppose you support killing millions of Koreans and bombing 70% of Pyongyang? Afterwards sanctioning the country to hell?
We just have to look at how the populations are faring between the two systems. Which population is enjoying a better quality of life? The Koreas are an experiment of the capitalist society versus the central economy. So we can take this data how we like. As far as sanctions go Korea has a land border with both Russia and China, so that should not have been a major factor in the centrally planned economy.
Yes please lets do that. Which system has twice the higher birth rates? Which system has more than twice larger military? Which system is self-sufficient? Which system has preserved their national culture and hasn't degenerated into little USA? Which system survived a genocidial war and being sanctioned by almost the entire world?
The two Koreas are a perfect example indeed, the South is for the degenerate liberals who only care about their access to fast food and porn, while the North is for patriots that wish to preserve their unique culture and way of life.
Great. I agree. Let's open the border between the Koreas and let people self-select.
I agree, just end the military occupation by the US first.
South Korea's perfectly able to disinvite the United States it whenever it wants.
Let's not move the goal post. The theory we're testing is that North Korea is superior to South Korea for the civilians. So we don't need to change anything to test this theory. Just open the border. And let anybody move with no restrictions. That'll help us see which is better for the people.
Lmao, sure
Its not moving any goal posts, remove the hostile precense first. Btw, why do you think South Korea needs to bribe any possible defectors with almost a million dollars? Surely just escaping the horrible North would be enough incentive? Why are there so few North Korean defectors, and even some of them complain how the North was better?
You're making it seem like the country is split only due to the North. As if it is their decision.
I don't see what's wrong with just letting everybody move how they want. Don't pay them at all. See where they move. Why can't we do that experiment?
Ok, we cant do such an experiment though, as neither country allows moving to either one. Tell me, why doesn't South Korea allow their citizens to even enter North Korea? Surely the freedom and liberty loving South Korea should allow this freedom to their citizens, are they not confident in their absolute superiority?
I'm not a politician of that country. But if I had to guess
Reciprocity
Usually open borders between countries requires a bilateral agreement between the countries to allow that movement. So opening the border for people to get stuck in the other country isn't great. And countries typically don't let that happen.
South Koreans certainly can fly to China and then take the land border into North Korea. Nothing stopping that
Excuses, if South Korea was so damn certain of their superiority, they'd allow unrestricted immigration into the North, afterall, isn't this the reverse of what you're saying?
I'm saying we should do an experiment allowing people to move freely to wherever they want between the two countries. I'm not saying anything else. I'm not making any assortations about quality of life, because it's not up to me it's about the people who live there.
Modifying the countries, or anything else is not my place, cuz I don't live there
Well thats not how real life works, and wondering about such experiments is a waste of time, its never going to happen. The situation with Korea is only resolved through war as long as the US is involved.
So you're saying South Korea does not have a right to exist?
Yes
Any other countries on your hit list?
The West in general, atleast in its current form.
What counts as the West?
What is commonly refered to the political West. The political bloc based on Western imperialism, im not going to list every country.
Okay. What gives a group of people the right to have self-determination? The right to form their own country?
Fiji is a country aligned with the West, I think. Does Fiji have a right to exist? Under what circumstances would Fiji have the right to exist? I want to understand the criteria
I did specify "in its current form" (meaning economically and politically, not statehood itself) for the West in general. Im a staunch defender of self-determination of nations, but self-determination doesn't include the oppresion and exploitation of other nations.
Korea being a split nation the only rightfull outcome is unifying the North and South, and obviously i prefer unifying them under the socialist North, rather than the imperialist South.
You said all Western countries don't have the right to exist.
Fiji is a Western country.
Are you now saying Fiji has a right to exist?
Is your position that all countries have a right to exist but not a right to influence other countries?
I'm trying to understand the philosophy behind your statements please help me
I say all nations (nation being seperate from state, not all nations have states currently) have the right to self-determination through their own state. But self-determination doesn't cover the exploitation and oppression of others, im sure you'd agree. The imperialist West is based on the imperialist exploitation of the global South, mainly through economic measures, although sometimes through direct military measures too.
I'm against this imperialism and wish to see Western nations overthrow their imperialist governments in favour of self-sustaining or atleast non-exploitative governments (global trade is possible without exploitation afterall).
I agree that imperialism is bad. Self-determination is paramount.
But now we come back to South Korea, they're not exerting force externally, they're not economically influencing other countries, they're not invading anybody. Why don't they have a right to exist, why don't the South Korean people have a right to self-determination?
South Korea takes part in Western imperialism through the Western market. One can think of it as South Korea knowingly buying stolen goods from a shady dealer because its cheaper.
And there is no "South Korean people", Korea is a nation, currently split due to political reasons. It goes against national self-determination to keep the Korean nation split. Were east-Germans a seperate people from west-Germans? Was it against their "right to exist" when Germany was united?
So any country that trades with Western countries doesn't have a right to exist?
I will point out that both China and Russia trade with the United States.
The argument that there's no such thing as the South Korean people because they used to be in the same country is interesting. Globally were one human race, but we have a variety of countries determined by who can defend their borders.
I wonder and under what circumstances in your philosophy would a group of people be allowed just to separate from their parent country?
Indeed, but do China and Russia import or export with the West? Mainly export, Russian and Chinese economy is based on domestic production and exporting it along with resources to the West, they don't get raw resources from the global South through the West (not in any significant way anyway), they don't enforce the comprador regimes in the global South. The West on the other hand relies on importing resources and production from the global South for half free. Cut the West from the global South and the West starves, do the same with China or Russia and, while not a fun time, they will manage.
It isn't just about trading with the West, but rather if one takes part in the imperialist exploitation of the global South.
This cosmopolitanism is baseless. If all humans are the same people divided by arbitrary borders, why not go strike up a conversation with lets say a Mandarin chinese person? Surely an arbitrary border won't limit your communication with your fellow human? I'll use the German example again, did East Germans become a seperate people from West Germans when Germany was split? Korea has been split just little longer than Germany was.
"Parent country" is a nebulous term, as a country isn't necessarily a nation, and a nation might not necessarily even have a country.
Okay. So people who speak the same language should be in the same country?
Or is it possible for people who speak the same language to be in different countries?
That is an oversimplification. Language along with ethnicity is the most obvious divider between peoples, but not the only one. I simply used it as an example due to its obviousnes, the definition of nation i find to be the most based on reality is: "A nation is a historically constituted, stable community of people, formed on the basis of a common language, territory and psychological make-up manifested in a common culture."
It is possible and happens, most notably with the Anglos, although there is a debate to be had whether the anglo states should unify under a common state, seeing as they pretty much are the same nation. An Englishman can easily move to Australia, understand everyone, and be indistinguishable from other Australians fairly quick. But were the same Englishman to move to Nigeria for example, he couldn't communicate with anyone, and would never assimilate into the nation.
Apparently the sanctions that started in 2006 erased 53 years of progress.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_sanctions_against_North_Korea
Why are you lying?
You said sanctioned by the West, not the US. The West didn't start sanctions until 2006. The US wasn't a primary trading partner of any eastern bloc county during the cold war so it wouldn't have made a difference.
The US is the de facto leader of the West, if it embargoes a country, it is embargoed by the West as well.
Show me the proof that members of the West other than the US sanctioned North Korea between 1991 and 2006.
Even Russia sanctioned North Korea starting in 2013 for their behavior.
Ah i see the goal posts have moved. Why don't you show me proof that there was any trade between the West and North Korea between this time. An embargo doesn't have to be an announced and official one.
And?
Really i don't even understand how this matters in the first place, i wouldn't have thought the claim that North Korea has been sanctioned would be so controversial. Pretty sure its common knowledge. Isn't it called the "hermit kingdom" or some such too?
Nah mate, you said the West followed the US in everything it did, back it up.
I believe that you have it backwards. North Korea, backed by China and with the approval and arming by the USSR, invaded South Korea. South Korea remains independent today because it was defended by the UN. The North's allies promised to rebuild the North after the war and poured billions of roubles into the country. They remained dependent on the eastern bloc countries until the USSR fell and China opened up to the West. The North's economy fell apart in the 1990's after they were no longer propped up by others. The US provided $600 million in aid for food and energy starting in 1995. Sanctions against North Korea did not start until 2006.
Fun fact, Russia a permanent member of the UN security council could a vetoed the UN resolution allowing UN intervention in The Korean civil war. But they were boycotting the UN at the time for some reason
North Korea invaded South Korea as much as revolutionary Americans "invaded" loyalist Americans.
North Korea indeed did have some troubles in the 1990s, which is to be expected when one is cut off from all support, yet they pulled through well and are now self-sufficient. One can't say the same about South Korea with its worsening living conditions and plummeting birth rates, and this is with Western support.
From Wikipedia:
Sounds way more like Russia invading Ukraine.
Was the American revolution an "invasion" against the english? Or the French revolution an "invasion" against the monarchists?
Cant you just go to Lemmygrad or Hexbear and cry there?
🥱
Imagine having a discussion with some that disagrees with you.
Look at Cuba, to see how much the US doesn't play fair with communist nations.