The country I'm in and global order that most other Lemmy users are in is in fact at war with Korea. It's not nuanced to make some kind of weird fucking image like exists at the head of this post, when our society is at war with Korea, all it does is justify intervention in Korea and demonize those who don't want to spend billions of dollars fighting a war overseas that helps nobody on the planet except for the billionaire class.

Again, I'm not claiming to agree with the post. My point was that simply because you are not from the country doesn't mean that you shouldn't have discourse about the conflict there. I think this whole comment section is a chance to educate people about a topic most people normally only get highly biased takes over, even if it the topic is originally broached via a mischaracterization.

Right now, the Korean Peninsula is split solidly in half between the resistance forces that freed it from Japanese occupation and those who collaborated with American intervention. That's just a fact.

That's a gross oversimplification that completely glosses over the Soviet s role in shaping North Korea. Yes, American intervention in the South is markedly worse. However, that doesn't negate the fact that the Soviet union did not allow the North to govern itself independently, and that has led to the Kim family purging some of the greatest minds in modern Korean history. The Soviet Union and America both agreed in 1945 to split responsibility of the nation in two, and they both ignorantly installed leaders based solely on their estimation on who would be most easily controlled.

Just because it was founded by resistance fighters doesn't mean it's a society without issues. But our society going to war with it only exacerbates those issues and doesn't allow it to develop.

Right, but talking about a country does not mean you're advocating for a foreign intervention. Your argument is based on an idea that discourse always has negative outcomes, and I just don't think that holds much weight. Nothing in anything I've stated has supported foreign intervention, none of your arguments are aimed at anything I've been saying.

So, no. Smearing an anti-imperialist stance as somehow dismissive colonialism isn't right. It's in fact quite the opposite.

You didn't make an anti-imperialist stance. You stated people not from the country in question have a right to speak about it. I'm completely fine with smearing an anti-imperialist stance. By ending discourse you end the conversation before people can actually rebute the imperialism, or even explain the negative outcomes of foreign intervention.

It's the approach that societies and people within them should be free to choose their destiny without external colonial interference that attitudes like the white chauvinist one from the OP only empower.

The current problems in North Korea can also be easily be traced back to the Soviets role in empowering Kim il sung instead of Pak Hon-yong, or any other of the founders of the Korean Communist party.

Do you want Korean society to change for the better? Then you have to advocate against the empire wherever you live in it.

Kinda sounds like a white person telling a Korean person what's best for Korea.....not chauvinist at all...

I can advocate against American imperialism and offer critical support to a country that is also a victim of foreign meddling by a former global power exerting its control upon my own people. What I won't do is listen to some virtue signaling white preach at me, when it's clear they don't even care to actually learn the history of my people.