Shouldn’t the role be “advertised” to other people as well? Why is it following the Kim family line when that seems completely against ML thought?

  • ☭CommieWolf☆
    39·
    10 months ago

    It’s not unusual for people from certain political families to simply stand out and hold a special place in a country’s politics. It’s a consequence of the immense popularity that a particular leader may have had during their tenure, which can end up rubbing off on those who have the same name. Assad is another example of this, and for the United states you have the Kennedys as well. India is another example, with the Ghandi family (no relation to THAT Ghandi) has had multiple generations of leaders voted in as prime minister or as opposition leaders.

    • Black AOC
      34·
      10 months ago

      The Bushes and Clintons are also an example in addition to the Kennedys; the Bush family has been manipulating Amerika into cryptofascist warhawkery since the end of World War 2.

      • SovereignStateEnglish
        12·
        10 months ago

        I’d vote for em (in this hypothetical) 🤷‍♂️

        I’d prolly also lambast anyone who decided they weren’t worth voting for as foolish. Much like term limit scaremongering, a lot of the sealioning about the Kim “dynasty” is predicated on a rather infantile understanding of democracy. Not that OP did or is doing this by asking in good faith.

      • redtea
        3·
        10 months ago

        Roosevelt’s are a good example because it was the popular one who made charges to benefit ordinary people and became so re-electable, they had to change the term limits to get rid of him.