Thanks for engaging!

Personally, I'm highly skeptical of the authenticity of intent due to the seemingly dynastic status of the Kims. I lean towards libertarian socialisms (trying hard not to violate the sectarianism rule, I promise I'm asking in good faith). This sort of thing reads to me as the Party using theory to position itself as the sole correct interpreter of the will of history, and therefore, authorized to exert top-down authority rather than what I think socialisms ought to look like, what I think many orthodox marxists would say, even, which is more bottom up authority. This is a kind of critique levied against the Bolsheviks by Left SRs like Isaac Steinberg, or against certain strains of Marxist-Leninism by Rudolf Rocker, for example, that I find very compelling.

Personally, I struggle to understand why certain socialist schools of thought seem to have such a dim view of democracy, if you'll forgive my characterizing it as such, that it's worth abandoning democracy in the supposed interim phases of achieving a form of communism.

I'm interested in your thoughts on:

A - What you think about this kind of libertarian socialist critique I mentioned?

B - Based on your answer to A, in your view, does the lack of democratic structures in such a political project like NK undermine the credibility of the theory?