this post was submitted on 19 Dec 2025
299 points (99.0% liked)

History Memes

1221 readers
1502 users here now

A place to share history memes!

Rules:

  1. No sexism, racism, homophobia, transphobia, assorted bigotry, etc.

  2. No fascism (including tankies/red fash), atrocity denial or apologia, etc.

  3. Tag NSFW pics as NSFW.

  4. Follow all Piefed.social rules.

Banner courtesy of @setsneedtofeed@lemmy.world

OTHER COMMS IN THE HISTORYVERSE:

founded 7 months ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] PugJesus@piefed.social 0 points 5 days ago (2 children)

No, no, this is exactly what's being proposed. North Korea is a vast and complex bureaucracy which boils down to a state run by a ruling caste that cannot own property and has been brainwashed since childhood to put the needs of the community over their own.

[–] bobo@lemmy.ml 1 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

Sure, and USA is a land of freedom and chances, where people are equal and nobody is being persecuted for their religion or the colour of their skin, and where money trickles down to water all of the working class.

Get real dude.

Afaik personal property is illegal in theory, but you can buy a car and have your family inherit it. The ruling class in theory doesn't own any private property, yet the Kim family owns a private island, yachts, luxury cars, and enough money to pay NBA players for a sleepover.

Also, you're forgetting a few key steps in making the Plato's polis like:

  • killing/exiling all adults before starting with the reforms
  • removing the concept of family, and instead having all children grow communally
  • a magical system to correctly grade newborns and assign them to the correct caste

Edit:

But again, you're comparing the myth of an actual society and it's actual state, with a hypothetical society that wasn't ever supposed to have an actual state. Plato purposefully Deus exes problems away so you can focus on what the polis represents - a metaphor for a righteous person.

[–] PugJesus@piefed.social 1 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

Sure, and USA is a land of freedom and chances, where people are equal and nobody is being persecuted for their religion or the colour of their skin, and where money trickles down to water all of the working class.

Get real dude.

"a state run by a ruling caste that cannot own property and has been brainwashed since childhood to put the needs of the community over their own." is not a positive or ideal description of NK, and I'm not entirely sure why you think a mythological interpretation of the USA is a response.

Afaik personal property is illegal in theory, but you can buy a car and have your family inherit it. The ruling class in theory doesn’t own any private property, yet the Kim family owns a private island, yachts, luxury cars, and enough money to pay NBA players for a sleepover.

Wow. Almost sounds like the theory is a bit flawed.

Also, you’re forgetting a few key steps in making the Plato’s polis like:

killing/exiling all adults before starting with the reforms

Oh boy, do I have some exciting news for you about the development of the DPRK

removing the concept of family, and instead having all children grow communally

Nominally true, but the system of collective education and totalitarian interest in family is close.

a magical system to correctly grade newborns and assign them to the correct caste

... individuals are assigned to their caste at birth according to their parentage, reassignments to another caste are done at adolescence or adulthood according to the Republic, and not by a magical system, but explicitly by the Guardians themselves.

But again, you’re comparing the myth of an actual society and it’s actual state, with a hypothetical society that wasn’t ever supposed to have an actual state. Plato purposefully Deus exes problems away so you can focus on what the polis represents - a metaphor for a righteous person.

As I said before, the argument fails on both metaphysical and political grounds - and you are here overwhelmingly supporting the political arguments of the Republic, so don't try to fucking cop-out with "It's all abstract philosophy, actually" now. Even if it is (and there is debate), you're sitting pretty here defending the literal and oligarchic arguments presented. The metaphorical (or not) nature of the work is thus irrelevant to the discussion thus far.

[–] Ougie@lemmy.world 0 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Ok this may be what is written on paper but the major difference - if I may state the obvious here - is that NK is a dictatorship. You have the fat guy on top of everything being worshipped as a god. His dad was before him and someone else from the family will be after, if the people don't wake up in the meantime. If you're learning about Plato from chatgpt or something you will see terms like philosopher kings etc which sound weird and may give off the wrong impression. To understand the concept you need to keep in mind what the world looked like back then. Also I understand that we now live in an era where philosophy is not appreciated as much as it was back then, the very term has been corroded by the capitalist ideas that prevail today. The main issue that Plato identified was that people in power are becoming corrupt and seek personal gain. His idea to have philosophers at the top is that people who have the capacity to think deeper understand the meaninglessness of such behaviours and can see the world from a selfless perspective, overcoming the greed for personal power and wealth. Now I'm not saying that Plato's vision is the perfect solution, but at the very least you should be able to see the benevolent nature of the proposal. You hating on it so much tells me you have not grasped the intention.

[–] PugJesus@piefed.social 1 points 4 days ago

If you’re learning about Plato from chatgpt or something

Christ.

No, I'm literally paraphrasing the Republic, with occasional glances at specific passages when I'm uncertain if I'm remembering correctly.

To understand the concept you need to keep in mind what the world looked like back then. Also I understand that we now live in an era where philosophy is not appreciated as much as it was back then, the very term has been corroded by the capitalist ideas that prevail today.

... one of the core complaints of the Republic, and the reason for the in-narrative dialogue, is the perception that contemporary people don't value philosophy

The main issue that Plato identified was that people in power are becoming corrupt and seek personal gain. His idea to have philosophers at the top is that people who have the capacity to think deeper understand the meaninglessness of such behaviours and can see the world from a selfless perspective, overcoming the greed for personal power and wealth. Now I’m not saying that Plato’s vision is the perfect solution, but at the very least you should be able to see the benevolent nature of the proposal.

On the contrary, the argument remains based on a selfish premise - one of the very first things established as a prerequisite for the whole discussion is the idea that just behavior leads to happiness for the just person. The point of making the ruling class philosophers is that philosophers will be able to understand what is and is not just (and, according to Plato's arguments there, no one chooses injustice except out of ignorance).

You hating on it so much tells me you have not grasped the intention.

Oh, I'm sorry, the system of oligarchic hereditary oppression has good intent, so I shouldn't hate it. Of course. Silly me. I'll start glazing the Chinese Confucian bureaucracy, medieval theocratic feudalism, and the Stalinist regime next.