During an unrelated discussion about something or the other (sports or something), I brought up a list of Asian countries, and instinctively accidentally said “DPRK” instead of “North Korea” during an actual conversation irl with a liberal that I often talk to. And after a little bit he produced the quote in the title. Referencing Voltaire’s “Not Roman, not holy nor an empire” quip.
In this context our liberal here was clearly taking a jab at the DPRK and how it supposedly doesn’t live up to it’s name.
At the time it annoyed me but I said nothing of it and laughed it off and got back on topic.
But thinking back I’m wondering if it could have been an opportunity to perhaps break some of the conditioning and maybe have him reflect on his preconceived notions. What would have been the best way to actually explain how the name is actually rather fitting, without risking triggering a liberal brain malfunction that defaults to spouting propaganda?
Ask them “which occupation zone was the first to hold an election after WWII ended?”
Ask the “which occupation zone has been a military dictatorship for most of its existence?”
Ask them “what percentage of the South Korean government spending was directly paid for by the US during the post war years?” And “can any country whose budget is almost completely dependent on another nation really call itself democratic?”
Homework for you: [Learn about People’s Committees](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/People’s_Committee_(postwar_Korea)#:~:text=The People’s Committees (Korean%3A 인민,August 1945 to early 1946.) this article is from Wikipedia, even your most liberal friend will respect it. The main source this article draws information from is dogshit, but the main points are important to know.
Listen to Blowback Season 3 Episode 3 “The Blue House”. You can hear about the first democratic experience of people in the North compared to South