> If you think you can legitimately compare the living conditions, political environment, and human suffering in North Korea that with the USA, you might have also brainwashed yourself
The parent comment wasn't comparing NK to the USA.
It was comparing the USA to every other developed country, where the USA ranks very poorly.
If the best example of current US performance relative to other developed countries you can think of is "killed fewer people than other protagonists in last century's World Wars" (which is essentially what your cited stats show) you may as well not bother.
n.b. I'm sure Rummel would grudgingly admit that the US is far worse than any other developed country for committing acts of "democide" this century. In fact it's probably the only metric in which a sane person could argue the US might have performed worse than North Korea in recent years.
You responded to a comment that the US ranked poorly in relation to 'every other developed country' with an outdated casualty count implying the US government might have been less deadly to human life than Germany, Japan and the UK before 1945 (and also less deadly than a few non-developed countries since then). I'm pretty sure the same set of statistics points towards the US government causing more deaths than other developed countries since 1945, which is why I thought it probably didn't help your case. Sorry.
The parent comment wasn't comparing NK to the USA.
It was comparing the USA to every other developed country, where the USA ranks very poorly.