I don’t mean to be only negative. There are great things about places like the USSR, China, Cuba, and probably North Korea too. However, I think that is due to the benefits of Platonic Aristocracy, not Socialism.

This is phrasemongering. Again, sterile and negative, endless gesturing and no clear points. Socialism is not some holy state of being, it's a concrete form of society where the working classes control the state and public ownership is the principal aspect of the economy. All of that applies to the listed states, while aristocracy applies to none.

You keep saying that I can’t expect non-western countries to have “western” democracy. It sounds like you’re saying only white people can have democracy. While there are plenty of non-western liberal democracies, I agree with the criticism that they aren’t that democratic. I would look to more radical forms, like DAANES, and urge the continued research into possible undiscovered strategies.

I don't keep saying that, actually. I have explained the difference between socialist democracy and liberal democracy, and the importance of consultative democracy. You picking DAANES as an example of what you would support just furthers this chauvanist viewpoint, treating structures that arise from socialists organizing in their own conditions and thinking you can just copy and paste to wildly different conditions. Again, you let the fact that the DPRK's democracy doesn't fit your individual preferences stand in the way of supporting the right of the DPRK to determine its own democratic structures based on their own conditions.

I didn’t realize Lemmy was so anti-left.

This is a cheap retort, not a real point. Marxists have attacked ultraleft dogmatists since Marx, it's not the leftism that's the problem, it's the anti-communism using "left" sounding arguments, your habit of letting your fantasy socialism stand in the way of those concretely building real socialism.

I’d never read Bordiga’s writings before, but I find his critique insightful:

This is not the point that was discussed, you dodged the point to talk about something irrelevant. Nobody is saying that absolutely everything Bordiga ever wrote was wrong, but instead that he was more of a metaphysician and an idealist, and as such his analysis was closer to that of a liberal, against real progressive movements and arresting the movement of socialists in the west.

The pro-DPRK memes aren’t anti-slavery, they are pro-slavery.

This is both a non-sequitor and is bullshit. I used the slavery point as an analogy to prove why "balance" is unnecessary, and as I explained the DPRK has no slavery. Universal conscription is not slavery.

Challenge accepted, I will try to make a meme that offers solutions, and I expect no negativity in response, as that isn’t comradely.

The merit of whatever you post will be judged on its own merits, the fact that this post is highly flawed for one set of reasons does not mean a different post would not have other flaws.

Pro-socialist, or pro-DPRK? If a group is critical of the DPRK do you consider it to be not socialist?

Depends, really, but I have found the DPRK to be a great litmus test for judging how serious a socialist org is.

Making a democratic state is hard. All the (limited, biased) evidence points toward an oppressive state in North Korea. Forgive me if I suspect there might be some grain of truth in it.

This isn't true, though. All of the legitimate evidence points towards a state governed by the working classes working in their collective interests.

It is such a great tragedy that Marx never finished “The State”. So many Marxists’ understanding of political power is skin-deep.

Vagueposting is worthless. Make a real point, don't try to justify your anti-Marxist position on class and the state by invoking Marx. You didn't even quotefarm Marx for this one, you just implied that what he may have written may have disagreed with his own positions and agreed with yours. This isn't an argument.