Post #4663765 · Elektrine

2026-09-10 13:45 UTC

it really bothers me how common imperial speak is that when we actually name things as they should we are the ones being pointed at. calling occupied korea “south korea” should be comparable to calling people slurs. it is literally accepting and endorsing that fascism could and should rule the “lesser people”. hawaii is a colony, puerto rico is a colony, japan is colony, korea is a colony, and so on, and so on, and so on.

Replies (2)

@Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2026-09-10 14:01

Mostly agreed, though I think south Korea/Corea and north Korea/Corea are valid terms (specifically keeping the cardinal directions lowercase). Capitalizing the direction reinforces the idea that these are separate peoples, but frequently the distinction is necessary when discussing this or that subject, such as the fact that taxation has been abolished in north Corea. I even more strongly prefer “northern” and “southern” as signifiers. The problem with using DPRK and ROK alone arises when we are discussing region, not state. The illegitimacy of the ROK as a colonial state set up by the US Empire does not really help us linguistically. The Corean people are one nation, divided. Essentially, I use DPRK/ROK the vast majority of the time, and “northern/southern Korea/Corea” when discussing relational, geographic matters.

Open ##4663805
@RiverRock@lemmy.ml 2026-09-10 17:50

Saying “South Korea” is factually no different from saying “French Indochina”

Open ##4664725