• 12 Posts
  • 112 Comments
Joined hace 5 meses
cake
Cake day: mar. 25, 2022

help-circle
rss

Elections for the supreme people's assembly in the DPRK: two questions
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/410209 > I have two questions regarding the election of the deputies to the supreme people's assembly in the DPRK. > > --- > In the [English translation of the nation's constitution I'm using](https://www.hrnk.org/uploads/pdfs/DPRK_Constitution.pdf) (article 34.) it says: > > The Supreme People's Assembly is composed of deputies elected on the basis of > universal, equal and direct suffrage by secret ballot. > > And in the translation of the law document [*Deputy Elections for People's Assemblies at Each Level Law of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (2010)*](https://www.lawandnorthkorea.com/laws/deputy-elections-for-peoples-assemblies-at-each-level-law-2010) (article 5.) it says: > > Deputy elections for People's Assemblies at each level shall be done by the method of secret ballot. Constituents shall be guaranteed the freedom of voting for or against. No one may require the publication of the fact of having voted for or against a constituent, and may not place pressure on or retaliate against someone related to the vote. > > And again in article 64.: > > Votes shall be done by method of secret ballot. If constituents agree, they shall not make a marking, and if they oppose, they shall horizontally strike out the name of the candidate. > > And most most relevant to my question in article 65.: > > In cases where constituents agree or make a mark of opposition in their vote, no one may enter or look into the polling rooms. > > All these articles seem to indicate to me that the vote is secret, and at the time of the casting of the vote no one else but the voter is allowed to be in the polling room. > > However [in videos depicting these elections](https://yewtu.be/watch?v=HbYItXAcV3M) we see some citizens entering the booth and casting their vote. This means there is a camera in the same room they are casting their vote. Doesn't this violate the principle of secret ballot stipulated by the constitution? One could argue that the citizen could have chosen to approve or reject a candidate in a separate room from where they cast their vote, but article 56. says this: > > Polling rooms shall be set up by 3 days before the election day so that the confidentiality of votes can be guaranteed. The polling room shall have a polling box and writing supplies. Election halls may be decorated with things like flags and flowers. > > If writing supplies and a polling box are supposed to be in the same room then that means that they are supposed to choose to approve of reject a candidate in the same room they cast their vote, so that means that in the video we are able to see whether they approved or rejected the candidate (one leaves it empty to approve a candidate and crosses out their name to reject), which means the principle of secret ballot was violated. > > The citizens seen in the polling room all were wearing medals or pins, which leads me to believe they were members of a party or had some official position. Could that be the reason we see them, considering it's pretty obvious whether they are going to approve or reject a candidate? > > Q: Why do we see citizens in the video casting their vote, if the ballot is supposed to be secret? > > --- > In many news it is said there is only one candidate per electoral precinct: > - [https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-47492747](https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-47492747) > - [https://www.scmp.com/video/asia/2189528/everyone-votes-there-no-choice-north-korean-elections](https://www.scmp.com/video/asia/2189528/everyone-votes-there-no-choice-north-korean-elections) > > Where can I find a source for whether or not there was more than one candidate up for election in each precinct? > > The document I mentioned earlier seems to indicate that there can be more than one candidate in a precinct up for election (otherwise why even make the election, besides serving as a census of the population?) (article 42 (Number of candidates for deputy to be registered at the electoral precinct)): > > The number of candidates for deputy registered with each electoral precinct at deputy elections for People’s Assemblies at each level shall not be restricted. > > If there was only one candidate up for election in each precinct, why weren't there more? Article 35: > > Candidates for deputy for People's Assemblies at each level shall be recommended directly by constituents, or recommended jointly or alone by the Party or by social organizations. The person making the recommendation must inform the recommended candidate for deputy to the district election committee. > > Article 36: > > Candidates for deputy recommended for People's Assemblies at each level may only be registered as candidates for deputy in the relevant electoral precinct by going through a deliberation over their qualifications at a meeting of more than a hundred constituents. The constituent meeting for the deliberation on qualifications of candidates for deputy shall be organized by the district election committee. > > Article 39: > > The registration of candidates for deputy by People's Assemblies at each level shall be decided by the agreement of more than half of the participants at the constituent meeting for deliberating on the qualifications of the candidates. > > Assuming that in article 35 "constituents" here means means members of the 100+ people chosen by the election committee (I'm assuming they are random citizens of the precinct, but I don't see anywhere anything about how those 100+ members of the constituent meeting are chosen, so this could be the source of my confusion), then citizens could bring up a potential candidate that they consider better represents them than the one brought forth by the DFRF. I would be surprised if that were the case and not have even a single instance where there was more than one candidate up for election (even if the country were to have an extremely unanimous view on who best represents them, I find it hard to imagine there isn't a single case where there was more than one candidate up for election). > > If we consider that the potential candidate has to be approved with a vote with an approval greater than 50% by the constituents in order to be registered as a candidate, then maybe one could say that maybe there were more potential candidates brought up but in the end it was decided to approve only one person to be registered as a candidate. But wouldn't that be an abuse of the system? I am interpreting the role of that constituent meeting to be the filtering out of candidates that do not meet the requirements to run for election, not to choose for the whole population of the precinct what candidate should win. > > Q: Do these elections really only have a single candidate up for election per precinct, and if yes, why aren't there more?

Elections for the supreme people's assembly in the DPRK: two questions
I have two questions regarding the election of the deputies to the supreme people's assembly in the DPRK. --- In the [English translation of the nation's constitution I'm using](https://www.hrnk.org/uploads/pdfs/DPRK_Constitution.pdf) (article 34.) it says: > The Supreme People's Assembly is composed of deputies elected on the basis of universal, equal and direct suffrage by secret ballot. And in the translation of the law document [*Deputy Elections for People's Assemblies at Each Level Law of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (2010)*](https://www.lawandnorthkorea.com/laws/deputy-elections-for-peoples-assemblies-at-each-level-law-2010) (article 5.) it says: > Deputy elections for People's Assemblies at each level shall be done by the method of secret ballot. Constituents shall be guaranteed the freedom of voting for or against. No one may require the publication of the fact of having voted for or against a constituent, and may not place pressure on or retaliate against someone related to the vote. And again in article 64.: > Votes shall be done by method of secret ballot. If constituents agree, they shall not make a marking, and if they oppose, they shall horizontally strike out the name of the candidate. And most most relevant to my question in article 65.: > In cases where constituents agree or make a mark of opposition in their vote, no one may enter or look into the polling rooms. All these articles seem to indicate to me that the vote is secret, and at the time of the casting of the vote no one else but the voter is allowed to be in the polling room. However [in videos depicting these elections](https://yewtu.be/watch?v=HbYItXAcV3M) we see some citizens entering the booth and casting their vote. This means there is a camera in the same room they are casting their vote. Doesn't this violate the principle of secret ballot stipulated by the constitution? One could argue that the citizen could have chosen to approve or reject a candidate in a separate room from where they cast their vote, but article 56. says this: > Polling rooms shall be set up by 3 days before the election day so that the confidentiality of votes can be guaranteed. The polling room shall have a polling box and writing supplies. Election halls may be decorated with things like flags and flowers. If writing supplies and a polling box are supposed to be in the same room then that means that they are supposed to choose to approve of reject a candidate in the same room they cast their vote, so that means that in the video we are able to see whether they approved or rejected the candidate (one leaves it empty to approve a candidate and crosses out their name to reject), which means the principle of secret ballot was violated. The citizens seen in the polling room all were wearing medals or pins, which leads me to believe they were members of a party or had some official position. Could that be the reason we see them, considering it's pretty obvious whether they are going to approve or reject a candidate? Q: Why do we see citizens in the video casting their vote, if the ballot is supposed to be secret? --- In many news it is said there is only one candidate per electoral precinct: - [https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-47492747](https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-47492747) - [https://www.scmp.com/video/asia/2189528/everyone-votes-there-no-choice-north-korean-elections](https://www.scmp.com/video/asia/2189528/everyone-votes-there-no-choice-north-korean-elections) Where can I find a source for whether or not there was more than one candidate up for election in each precinct? The document I mentioned earlier seems to indicate that there can be more than one candidate in a precinct up for election (otherwise why even make the election, besides serving as a census of the population?) (article 42 (Number of candidates for deputy to be registered at the electoral precinct)): > The number of candidates for deputy registered with each electoral precinct at deputy elections for People’s Assemblies at each level shall not be restricted. If there was only one candidate up for election in each precinct, why weren't there more? Article 35: > Candidates for deputy for People's Assemblies at each level shall be recommended directly by constituents, or recommended jointly or alone by the Party or by social organizations. The person making the recommendation must inform the recommended candidate for deputy to the district election committee. Article 36: > Candidates for deputy recommended for People's Assemblies at each level may only be registered as candidates for deputy in the relevant electoral precinct by going through a deliberation over their qualifications at a meeting of more than a hundred constituents. The constituent meeting for the deliberation on qualifications of candidates for deputy shall be organized by the district election committee. Article 39: > The registration of candidates for deputy by People's Assemblies at each level shall be decided by the agreement of more than half of the participants at the constituent meeting for deliberating on the qualifications of the candidates. Assuming that in article 35 "constituents" here means means members of the 100+ people chosen by the election committee (I'm assuming they are random citizens of the precinct, but I don't see anywhere anything about how those 100+ members of the constituent meeting are chosen, so this could be the source of my confusion), then citizens could bring up a potential candidate that they consider better represents them than the one brought forth by the DFRF. I would be surprised if that were the case and not have even a single instance where there was more than one candidate up for election (even if the country were to have an extremely unanimous view on who best represents them, I find it hard to imagine there isn't a single case where there was more than one candidate up for election). If we consider that the potential candidate has to be approved with a vote with an approval greater than 50% by the constituents in order to be registered as a candidate, then maybe one could say that maybe there were more potential candidates brought up but in the end it was decided to approve only one person to be registered as a candidate. But wouldn't that be an abuse of the system? I am interpreting the role of that constituent meeting to be the filtering out of candidates that do not meet the requirements to run for election, not to choose for the whole population of the precinct what candidate should win. Q: Do these elections really only have a single candidate up for election per precinct, and if yes, why aren't there more?

Note that there are quite a few inaccuracies in The Anarchist Cookbook.

Regarding the fragility of human life, I don’t know anything.


Helium is by no means a scarce element, it’s after Hidrogen the second most abundant in the universe, 24% of the total element mass. It is not as abundant on Earth and has to be obtained from natural gas

Scarce for us terrestrians that don’t live in a futuristic sci-fi world where we go around harvesting resources from planets.


which is why it is used in current weather balloons

Actually I think people use both hydrogen balloons and helium balloons for that.

The problem with helium is that it’s already very scarce, despite having very important uses across many fields and once it’s gone it’s gone (unless maybe if somewhere in the future we begin using nuclear fusion, I guess)


Couldn’t we somehow engineer a more modern airship that uses the much more available hydrogen instead, but with proper measures against the outbreak of fires?



I’m confused. What is the context of this? Why did Pelosi go to Taiwan and why were planes dispatched?



Aren’t ACs kinda expensive, to the point that only big buildings have those?


For a moment I thought it was supposed to be a map of the average difficulty people play geometry dash at.


Yeah, I think using a gun in self-defense won’t do much, but increase the likelihood of the situation escalating.

Just give them your money, if you are being assaulted. The money isn’t worth your life.


@FareshtoasklemmyDoom Scrolling
link
fedilink
4
edit-2
un mes

Does that phenomenon have a name? I noticed it with me and I thought it was due to one (or a combination) of these things:

  • Me being a bad person/slug that never does anything significant to improve the world

  • Being confronted with a lot of suffering and death in news and social networks.

  • Prolonged social isolation


So you like the number 171 122 452 428 141 311 372 468 338 881 272 839 092 270 544 893 520 369 393 648 040 923 257 279 754 140 647 424 000 000 000 000 000?


Can’t one slide the string off of the product? Does the device pull the string and track any changes in its length?



Doesn’t at all look like that. This is what I see:


I’ve seen this Braille art a couple of times on lemmy now, but I still cannot see what it is supposed to portray. It resembles a bit like a head, a tree house or two people running, but none of the descriptions fit well.


Never drank coffee, but I do drink black tea from time to time. Weirdly the tea actually makes me kinda sleepy (only on certain occasions do I drink it, therefore I don’t think it’s caffeine tolerance acquired by consumption), so I only drink it for the joy rather than any practical purpose. I drink other kinds of tea more often.


Yeah, it was kind of a bad joke and just sounds weird. My reasoning behind the answer was the following:

  • Your own children are probably one of the things you love the most in this world, it is rare for someone to hate their child. (therefore they are most loved as requested by the question)
  • Conceiving, gestating and giving birth is an effort from the mother, and therefore the offspring can be called the fruits of her work. (and are thus fruit as requested by the question) I thought that giving this answer would be unexpected in the context of this question, but make sense with the reasoning given (“the fruits of a mother’s labour”). I considered that to be a bit funny.
  • Labour is a synonym of work, but can also refer to the last stage of pregnancy. Depending on the meaning the word “labour” takes, the sentence’s meaning does change, but both interpretations still make sense in the context of the answer. I thought that that double meaning adds a bit more to the fun mentioned in the previous point.

I don’t know about the other stuff, but at least the nether can be added through one of the many mods. Minecraft players may also be interested in the Minetest game Mineclone (or Mineclone 2) which attempts to replicate Minecraft as much as possible.


Powered with Godot.

Collaborative editing on Emacs across editors/IDEs?
Is there any way to use Emacs for collaborative editing, while there is at least one person who doesn't use emacs, but rather some popular IDE? It should also be possible to edit multiple files at the same time. Other solutions seem to expect all people to be using Emacs.


How good of an idea would it be to damage cars on the dealer's and manufacturer's side?
Some months ago there was this post on this community: [https://lemmy.ml/post/189513](https://lemmy.ml/post/189513). The idea suffers from the fact that it pretty much only harms normal people who just bought SUVs because they live in a car dependent society, where if you want to feel empowered you need to buy the biggest most inefficient cars available, people who now are led to hate the anti-car movement. I wonder if instead of slashing tires of random SUV drivers in the streets, one could significantly damage the cars before they are sold, harming the automotive industry and (possibly) lowering supply. But would it actually be a good idea? - Wouldn't it just be a waste of materials? Now, nature not only suffers from the production of a car, but also of the fixing of a car. - Would it actually have any impact, besides maybe calling attention to the problem? So many cars are produced in a day. Would a few damaged ones have any major impact? - Is it even feasible? Can people just go into wherever a lot of cars are stored before they are distributed or sold, and significantly damage some without getting caught?

What meals do you know which aren't too time consuming to prepare (or if they are last for a very long time), are cheap and whose ingredients are easy to acquire?
Bonus if it isn't just mainly carbon-hydrates and if the ingredients don't need to be used immediately (unless the meal itself when done can last for many days). I'm getting tired of tuna masala spaghetti.

How do I only sign a mail with mailvelop on Posteo?
I only see the option to encrypt the mail. ![](https://lemmy.ml/pictrs/image/e24f7dcb-58f3-48aa-aaf3-fa358eff33f3.png)

3



Advocacy on subreddits that are involved in the DOSing of the Lemmygrad instance of Lemmy?
Is it counterproductive to explain misconceptions about Lemmy and advocate for its use on anti-communist subreddits that have suddenly given Lemmy a lot of attention (some by DOSing) due to the quarantining of the GenZedong subreddit and subsequent migration of its users from there to Lemmygrad? I thought it could be a great way to increase Lemmy adoption now that it is getting so much attention from them. However, some people on there actively are trying to harm the Lemmygrad instance, and I worry commenting on there would bring more of that unwanted attention to that instance. Should I or should I not get involved? I'm talking about these people: * [https://old.reddit.com/r/EnoughCommieSpam/comments/tmi1o4/we_found_out_where_genzedong_went_feel_free_to/](https://old.reddit.com/r/EnoughCommieSpam/comments/tmi1o4/we_found_out_where_genzedong_went_feel_free_to/) * [https://old.reddit.com/r/GenUsa/comments/tm0ils/guess_who_else_is_on_lemmygrad/](https://old.reddit.com/r/GenUsa/comments/tm0ils/guess_who_else_is_on_lemmygrad)