You've been looking in the wrong direction, the dangers are coming from the right.

See how easy it is to make a typo?

Almost as easy as it is to misinterpreting the meaning of someone's post. 😉

Now you're just being a jerk.

According to Marxist writing, North Korea fails at being a Communist country just as must as it fails at being a democratic one. It has, and probably never will, reach any kind of Communism because of how it's structured. A family dynasty running a country is not Communism, as laid down by Marx (you know...one of the guys who wrote the Communist Manifesto). No power resides in the hands of the people of North Korea, so on that basis alone it's a failure in that regard. The proletariat has no say in political matters, which goes against the very fundamental basis of Communism. Likewise, North Korea's focus on race eliminates it from the sphere of Communism, as Communism is supposed to be free of such constraints.

But rather than Marxism or European Communism, North Korea's base political machinations were derived from Japanese exceptionalism due to the fact that they were influenced by it for much of the first half of the 20th Century. When the Japanese were kicked out in 1945, the Russians propped up Kim Il Sung and the rest is history.

The thing is, if you apply what Marx wrote to any of these self proclaimed "Communist" countries, they fail miserably. Marx wouldn't have looked upon any of the countries we call "Communist" as such, no matter what they claim. At best, they reach a kind of Socialism, albeit under a dictatorial regime - itself an anti-Marxist form of power, when it doesn't belong in the hands of the people.

This has nothing to do with how somebody "feels" about a country either. It's about the ability to see beyond the propaganda of a political system and view what they actually are. Juche may claim all sorts derivations from Marxist-Leninist theory, but the practices of the DPRK show a very different reality from anything that Marx would have approved of.

At the end of the day, calling North Korea "Communist" simply ignores a whole host of problems regarding what the country does in reality. It's about as legitimate as considering the country the "Democratic" People's Republic of Korea. And in fact, references to Communism have all but disappeared from the country since the 90's. So they don't even rattle that noise themselves any more.

Communism as described in the communist manifesto is the only true form of communism then?

A fair number of communist nations made it their business to concern themselves with race and ethnicity. The Russian solution to their distaste for Jews was initially pogroms and then they're solution was send them as far away as possible (Oblast).

Then we have the Gulags, don't agree with the state? Go to the gulag. Do anything the state doesn't like at all, go to the gulag.

The most hard line communist regime in history the Khmer Rouge massacred people indiscriminately based on social status and or race, if you wore glasses you were likely to have your head caved in with a hatchet.

Should I list every communist regime that rained misery down on its people or do we get the picture?

You seem to have a idealistic notion of the virtues of communism and explain away the misdeeds of communist regimes by claiming they're unworthy of the name communist because Marx and Engels would not see their regimes as a pure representation of the communist manifesto.

North Korea is as pure a reflection of just how crap an ideology communism really is and how it can be interpretated in many ways and always to the detriment of the people living under it's variously interpretated doctrine.

No state has ever achieved Communism. At best, they've reached a form of Socialism, which has many forms. Communism is the end stage of the Socialist journey, according to Marx - the guy who, along with Engels, came up with the concept. China never achieved it, the USSR never achieved it (Keushcev was still promising it some time in the 80's in a speech during the 1950's), Vietnam never achieved it, Cambodia never achieved it and neither did North Korea.

As I've said, I'd argue that Communism is impossible to achieve, because there's too much standing in the way of it from a practical nature. And certainly it's impossible when applied to vast nations such as Russia. On an extremely small scale, it might be a possibility. But not when it comes to large land masses.

Communism is the elimination of all private ownership, elimination of class and money and political power derived from the people. None of the so called Communist states has ever even come close to such a reality.

That's just your interpretation. 😉

Societies end up as totalitarian because of the dictators that seize power. There's nothing inherently "totalitarian" about leftist thinking, "radical" or otherwise. But that doesn't eliminate the possibility of a nefarious power using leftist ideals to take and hold control of a given country. Likewise right wing belief can lead to a totalitarian state too.

Germany ended up under a right wing totalitarian power. Italy too. When power is taken by people who refuse to relinquish it by the will of the people, that transcends any left/right dynamic.

Hilarious.

This thread is a nonsense to begin with, the OP should set up a blog if they don't want a conversation where differing opinions are expressed.

It was Zahawi who paid the multi-million-pound settlement to the tax authorities. For no reason, of course. He definitely wasn't deliberately avoiding tax. Oh no.

Now rando members of the public are your examples?

Do you remember that story 2 weeks ago about the American man who has stalked a girl from County Clare for 20 years?

He had 'F-ck Trump' and 'No Russians' on his Twitter page.

Any commentary you disagree with is shouted down immediately.

Let's break down the thread title to begin with;

1. You've been looking in the wrong direction... Really? What direction have we been looking in exactly? Is the world in general unaware of the existence of far right extremist groups and likely to be blindsided by them? Oh hang on, the far right is literally blamed for everything in western media all the time so whatever direction you contend people have been looking in they'd need to have their eyes closed to not see hysteria about the far right.
2. The dangers are coming from the right... This is the cherry on top of the nonsense cake. There are demonstrably dangers coming from the right and the left. Whenever the dangers coming from the left are outlined they're shooed away and we're told they're actually caused by the right or that the far left regimes in question are actually far right regimes because, feelings.

You see my pointing out the dangers posed by the far left as an endorsement of the far right. As if anything that deviates from your opinion is inherently right wing.

In the end there are dangers aplenty in the world some are coming from the right some are coming from the left.

You are contending that only the dangers posed by the right are problematic and that without your assistance nobody would even be looking in the correct direction to be able to detect them.

Like I said, pure nonsense.