North Korea Revolution: Possible?

[The Guy]

North Korea is becoming more pressured by the day by imperialist nations who seem aimless to what their final objective is. Totalitarian leader, Kim Jong-il, is obviously trying to cut off all ties with the outside world, but, unfortunately, this results in poverty and mass deaths within North Korea.

From a young age, North Koreans and exposed to fierce propaganda, and are indoctrinated from the moment they first open their eyes. Kim Jong-Il is viewed as more than a leader as well as his father Kim Il-Sung, they are viewed as gods; saviours of the nation and praise towards them follows accordingly. With this, the North Korean people are completely unaware of any existence of the outside world (this claim is from many documentaries with North Korean defectors I've seen) and are told that they are the best off country in the world.

With this information in mind along with all the other snippets which make North Korea so horribly beautiful, would it ever be possible for North Korean citizens to lead a revolution and over throw the Kim Jong-Il, or do you think the country would benefit staying the way it currently is?

[AK]

Revolution in the North would be a massive and immensely difficult task to undertake, considering that about 20% of military-age men are in the armed forces. And fuck no, the workers of North Korea wouldn't benefit from the horse-shit that they're stuck with at all.

[AnthArmo]

It is entirely possible that we simply don't have enough information to determine this. North Korea is very "closed off". As you yourself alluded, most of our information of NK comes from undercover journalists.

That said, I have a little theory.

Historically, authoritarian regimes, particularily feudal ones, would repress their populace not through sheer brute force, but through starvation. If your a peasant farmer who is hungry, your number one priority is going to be food. You will be too hungry to rebel.

NK is combining the best of two worlds. A highly repressive police force and prison/concentration camp system, constant propaganda, and starvation. In fact, I wouldn't be suprised if the policy of "Military First" was made with this at least partially in mind. It is the perfect authoritarian regime.

However, to quote (*shudder*) Yeltsin, "You can build a throne from bayonets, but you can't sit on it for long". This is, in esscence, a military dictatorship. Military Dictatorships are expensive. North Korea is literally unable to maintain a massive police-military force forever. Sooner or later it will become too expensive to maintain. And when North Korea is finally unable to sustain an enourmous military, there will still be the exploited and starving masses...

I think you can see where this is going. Just give it time, North Korea will inevitably collapse in on itself. And heck, maybe we can see some genuine Socialism arise in the process.

[it_ain't_me]

From a young age, North Koreans and exposed to fierce propaganda, and are indoctrinated from the moment they first open their eyes.

so are americans.


With this, the North Korean people are completely unaware of any existence of the outside world (this claim is from many documentaries with North Korean defectors I've seen)

and yet, at the same time, we are also told that north koreans passionately hate and acutely fear all other countries, above all the united states. funny how that works.


and are told that they are the best off country in the world.

i don't think you really need me to point out that this one is identical to america. the icing in the case of american propaganda about itself is that it also aggressively pushes an image of itself as being the most *humanitarian* country in the world. nevermind the inherent contradictions between accumulating vast wealth for yourself (being the ''best off country in the world'') while others starve, and being a ''humanitarian''. pay no attention to that man behind the curtain!

[pranabjyoti]

Well, instead of looking for a revolution in North Korea, we better try for a revolution in USA. That will serve the world proletariat better. In my opinion, the best way is remove all kind of sanctions over North Korea and let's see what will happen. Until and unless, the rest of the (imperialist) world put on the burden of "sanctions" over the people of North Korea, the "military dictator REGIME" of North Korea will always have a very good reason to maintain itself. COMRADES, if you are really worried about the workers of North Korea, then kindly pressurize your imperialist Governments to lift all sanctions over North Korea. That, though perhaps not better, but will serve almost as good as a REAL SOCIALIST revolution in North Korea.
Actually, this thread is an example how "anarchy" can serve imperialism and why anarchist LEFTISTS are so much favored by imperialism.

[Wanted Man]

Absolutely agreed with the post above. People should think about what they're suggesting, about what the logical consequences are.

Case in point: one person here actually suggested that the DPRK government is deliberately starving its people to terrorise them. Any backing for this one? The way propaganda works is that if you'd suggest any kind of state terrorism from the American government, most people would say, "How can you believe that? You sound like a conspiracy theorist!" But it's acceptable for foreign countries that don't walk in line.

More specific to Revleft is that if you make any general statements about "the people" or "the [nationality]" (Americans or whatever), someone is likely to reprimand you for not specifically mentioning "the workers". But it's okay to generalise "the North Koreans" as a collection of brainwashed goons (possible connection to stereotypes about "robotic" orientals? I guess that can't be proved).

I'm not saying, "Don't criticise other countries than your own," but it seems really ridiculous for self-described socialists to consistently take pot shots only at those countries that have been the favourite scapegoats of our presidents and prime ministers for decades without even thinking, "Hmm, something's not right here." The enemy is at home; it's not some foreign president who is caricatured as a James Bond villain.

[this is an invasion]

Actually, this thread is an example how "anarchy" can serve imperialism and why anarchist LEFTISTS are so much favored by imperialism.

Oh please. When was the last time a Communist organization was harassed by the FBI? The Fifties?

[Wanted Man]

In the USA maybe. In other places, including the west, it's a daily reality. Even here it is known that socialist groups and anarchists of several stripes have some kind of surveillance to deal with.

[this is an invasion]

In the USA maybe. In other places, including the west, it's a daily reality. Even here it is known that socialist groups and anarchists of several stripes have some kind of surveillance to deal with.
Yes, he was talking about the US. If anarchists are so favored by imperialist powers, why is the biggest imperialist power so afraid of them?

[Panda Tse Tung]

Oh please. When was the last time a Communist organization was harassed by the FBI? The Fifties?
From CIA files which are released (more then 20 years old that is, for them to release them) i'd say 20 years ago. But of course we all know i mean today.
I'm not suggesting the anarchists are favored, though generally viewed as less of a treath by many governments. Prolly including the US.

Now back to the topic:



Sooner or later it will become too expensive to maintain. And when North Korea is finally unable to sustain an enourmous military, there will still be the exploited and starving masses...Since your post is 95% speculation and 5% half-knowledge it seems silly to answer this post, but i will anyway.
The military consists of conscripts, who do active military duty for 5 years. However a lot, if not most of this time is spend working in the fields, working on infrastructure, etc... etc... That is, the military is not some unproductive force similarly to the military in other countries. Therefore they will be able to sustain the army for as long as they plan things right.
Secondly, the starvation is a recent event and every wave of starvation was caused not by the great evil of the North Korean government, but by the fact that cropse failed due too floodings.
All of this knowledge requires little study, in fact a lot of information aout North Korea can be gathered by viewing the documentary's of Daniel Gordon (not too difficult i assume; watching a film). Which are respectively: 'The game of their lives', 'A state of mind' and 'Crossing the line'. All of which can be viewed on youtube.

Have a nice day building conspiracy theories.

[this is an invasion]

From CIA files which are released (more then 20 years old that is, for them to release them) i'd say 20 years ago. But of course we all know i mean today.
I'm not suggesting the anarchists are favored, though generally viewed as less of a treath by many governments. Prolly including the US.

I'm sure the CIA and FBI keep files on everyone. I'm talking about actual harassment. Like the FBI comes to your house and fucks everyone up and takes your shit. Or comes to your space and intimidates you. Or puts bugs/taps on your phones, and in your personal property.


I'm not being blindly sectarian when I say this, but when I hear Leninist type organizations say they are the biggest threat to the US government, it is usually blatant ego stroking. I'm not saying that anarchists are the biggest threat, but I am saying that anarchists are on the receiving end of government intimidation and crack downs far more than Leninists are.

[Panda Tse Tung]

I'm not being blindly sectarian when I say this, but when I hear Leninist type organizations say they are the biggest threat to the US government, it is usually blatant ego stroking. I'm not saying that anarchists are the biggest threat, but I am saying that anarchists are on the receiving end of government intimidation and crack downs far more than Leninists are.

TBH, i dont know how the specific situation is in the US, so you could tell me anything and i'd just have to assume it is true. It just sounded extremely smug (not to say that what you we're responding too was not smug).

[this is an invasion]

TBH, i dont know how the specific situation is in the US, so you could tell me anything and i'd just have to assume it is true. It just sounded extremely smug (not to say that what you we're responding too was not smug).

I don't see any reason to be smug about the fact that my friends get fucked with by the FBI.

[Panda Tse Tung]

I don't see any reason to be smug about the fact that my friends get fucked with by the FBI.
Smug towards leninists. Not smug about yourself and your friends.

[this is an invasion]

Smug towards leninists. Not smug about yourself and your friends.

Oh. No, I just dislike them.


sry to derail the thread. bai

[Starport]

Smug towards leninists. Not smug about yourself and your friends.

Thanks comrades. Is that it?

NK is dehumanise in the press and TV imperialist propaganda in the same way as any state or organisation that puts-up a spirited resistance to imperialism.

The looses in this propaganda battle, if you look at the poverty and chaos in imperialist 'spheres of interest', are the imperialist press and TV editors.

Get to work on exposing the lies. That's the job comrades.

[it_ain't_me]

i feel the need to add something to my previous post, something that might connect well with leftists who are aghast that any other leftist would ''support'' the dprk. if anyone thinks that i am fighting to make my country look like present day north korea, they are way off the mark. i fight for worldwide socialism, not isolated socialist garrison states. but when i look at the world around me, and i behold a few of what could be called isolated socialist garrison states, i ask myself, why do these exist? how could such an internationalist philosophy have produced countries which seem to be set against the whole international community? and then i realize who's fault it is. it wasn't the dprk that chose to be isolated. it wasn't cuba that chose to be under an embargo. it wasn't vietnam that chose to pick a fight with first the french and then the americans. the difference between someone who defends north korea and someone who supports north korea is enormous. to support north korea, in the sense of seeing it as a new socialist ideal, would be ludicrous, and just as ahistorical of a position as it is to blame the nature of the dprk on the north koreans themselves. to defend the dprk, however, against physical attack and twisted propaganda, is not to abandon internationalism whatsoever. it's merely to recognize context--that is, history. of course i see how far the dprk is from the international socialist ideal for which i fight. and i recognize how it got that way. and it isn't the fault of those crazy, xenophobic, totalitarian north koreans. it is the fault of those rational, calculating, self-interested capitalists, and the armies they manage to muster through the national governments which are subservient to them.

i think this is the main reason for the disconnect between leftists who defend north korea and those who get their panties in a twist over leftists defending north korea. it's not that one group thinks north korea is fucked up and the other one thinks it isn't. it's about whose fault it is that north korea is like it is. some will point to the difference, for instance, between north korea and cuba, as evidence that the dprk is not a necessary reaction to imperialism but a product of a warped ideology. i don't buy it. who can say why one animal, when cornered, chooses to play dead, while another arches its back and extends its claws? either way, is the difference between the two evidence that the real culprit is anyone other than the asshole kid who corners animals and pokes them with sticks?

[Adi Shankara]

I watched a documentary produced by the BBC and by North Korean state television where they basically have everyone worship Kim Jong Il. I know there is indoctrination like that on par here in the USA, specifically, for the founding fathers...but it's not an arrestable offense for doing so, nor can you say that Kim Jong Il is truly a people's hero, living in what might as well be a golden palace filled with every pleasure known to man.

[Wanted Man]

(post)

I thanked this, not because I agree with every word of it, but because it's a viewpoint that I can really respect. Very well said.


I watched a documentary produced by the BBC and by North Korean state television where they basically have everyone worship Kim Jong Il. I know there is indoctrination like that on par here in the USA, specifically, for the founding fathers...but it's not an arrestable offense for doing so, nor can you say that Kim Jong Il is truly a people's hero, living in what might as well be a golden palace filled with every pleasure known to man.

The BBC and the NK state TV made a documentary together?

[4 Leaf Clover]

mass deaths
dont trust everything you hear on cable tv. There is no mass deaths in North Korea


From a young age, North Koreans and exposed to fierce propaganda, and are indoctrinated from the moment they first open their eyes.
this is true


With this information in mind along with all the other snippets which make North Korea so horribly beautiful, would it ever be possible for North Korean citizens to lead a revolution and over throw the Kim Jong-Il, or do you think the country would benefit staying the way it currently is?
would it make things any more good in the current situation ? Truth is , North Korea is revisionist , thruth is North korea is barely socialist. But thruth is , North Korea takes anti-imperialist stance , and thruth is , all of its opponents are capitalists , and seek to overthrow its government

do you think revolution in North Korea would be of any use ?

[Adi Shankara]

The BBC and the NK state TV made a documentary together?

according to the narrator in the documentary, it was filmed "100% with the full cooperation of North Korean authorities" so I'm assuming he's referring to NK state TV:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QSrcLC6Zz54

considering the media access the journalists received, I'm not about to accuse them of lying.

Check out the part where they're in the North Koreanclass room and the teacher says that Kim Jong Il can control the weather, and he is the fount of all revolutionary ideas--if that isn't a little something to be susceptible of, I don't know what is.

[Os Cangaceiros]

Actually, this thread is an example how "anarchy" can serve imperialism and why anarchist LEFTISTS are so much favored by imperialism.

Anarchy actually has a very specific meaning in the field of political science. States combat anarchy in the global sense by forming alliances, interlinked systems of finance, intergovernmental organizations, coalitions etc. The days of mercantilism are over and no one nation can completely go it alone on the world stage anymore (including the United States). So no, I don't think that anarchy serves imperialism, seeing as governments actively try to negate it.

I'm not sure what you mean by the charge that anarchist leftist "are so much favored by imperialism".

[Prairie Fire]

Oh my god....



North Korea is becoming more pressured by the day by imperialist nations who seem aimless to what their final objective isThere is nothing aimless about it; the intended final outcome is the complete dismantling of any vestiges of common property and social ownership in the DPRK , and the subversion of that countries soveriegnty to imperialist interests.



Totalitarian leader, Kim Jong-il,Are we really going to have the "totalitarian" argument again?

I'll leave it at this: find me a reference to the word "totalitarian" in the english language prior to 1917.


is obviously trying to cut off all ties with the outside world,
That is not "obvious", so much as it is a LIE, which is not supported by facts.

I live in Canada, and the DPRK actually has diplomatic relations with more countries than Canada does.

I like how you also present the situation of diplomatic relations between the DPRK and the world in a decontextualized perspective, minus the crippling economic embargo, minus the "Foal-Eagle" joint military exercises performed near their border annually, minus the historical and ongoing contemporary aggression from other powers (chiefly the United States), etc.

In your version, the world has extended open arms to the DPRK, with no demands that they relinquish their soveriegnty or vestiges of collective social property and social programs, and it is the actions and persynal whims of the Korean head of state that are isolating the the DPRK, without any sort of external stimulus to do so. Why? Reason unknown.


I can see that you have done pain-staking research.:rolleyes:



but, unfortunately, this results in poverty and mass deaths within North Korea.So... we are going to look at North Korean trade, completely without even mentioning the existence of the economic embargo on their country?

In your version of events, the lack of foriegn trade can be chalked up to stubborness?



From a young age, North Koreans and exposed to fierce propaganda, and are indoctrinated from the moment they first open their eyes.... in sharp contrast to citizens of every other country on the planet.:rolleyes:

I'm not going to defend every single statement of the DPRK media as being the gospel truth, but it is telling that you choose to focus solely on the alleged Korean propaganda machine (something you have most likely never witnessed yourself,), but ignore the same amount of distorted media in your own country, where ever that may be. By grilling the DPRK for this, not only is there an unspoken implication that other countries have sincere and prinicpled media untainted by political motives of the class in power, but also you are trying to build a case for 'regime change', as you elaborate on later in your paragraph.


With this, the North Korean people are completely unaware of any existence of the outside world Absolute bullshit.

I suppose this is why students learn english in school; to speak with people from countries that they are unaware exists.


(this claim is from many documentaries with North Korean defectors I've seen)Speaking of propaganda...


and are told that they are the best off country in the world. So the DPRK is the only country in the world that has nationalism?

Also, you can't equate this nationalism with the nationalism of imperialist powers. While nationalism is a very dangerous fire to play with, one must distinguish between the nationalism of the oppressor and the nationalism of the oppressed.

The nationalism of the oppressor is chauvenism, is an impetus to conquer, to sieze power and maintain it at all costs at the expense of others.

The nationalism of the oppressed is defiant resistance to oppression, it is identifying with all others who suffer, and it is the iron will to achieve/maintain self determination at all costs, or die trying.

The nationalism in the DPRK, a nation under economic embargo and very real annual threats of military aggression, is the nationalism one would expect to find in a country under siege.


would it ever be possible for North Korean citizens to lead a revolution and over throw the Kim Jong-Il, or do you think the country would benefit staying the way it currently is? Of all of the places in the world that require revolution, why are you baying for the blood of the DPRK?

All of the imperialist powers, all of the capitalist countries, all of the nations where exploitation and private property are the norm... these nations escape your cold gaze. Instead, it is soveriegn nations with at least some vestiges of collective property and social programs that you are calling for regime change in.

Your view is perfectly in line with the aspirations of the United States and it's allies, financiers and agitators of "revolutions" in several other countries which "communists" like yourself have consistently clapped and cheered for. That alone should be enough to get you to reconsider your viewpoint, hopefully.


That said, I have a little theory. Your 'theory' is simply your own prejudices projected onto the DPRK, without all of the inconviences of historical context and factual accuracy.



Historically, authoritarian regimes, particularily feudal ones, The implication being that the DPRK is "Feudal"?



would repress their populace not through sheer brute force, but through starvation. If your a peasant farmer who is hungry, your number one priority is going to be food. You will be too hungry to rebel.You believe that this was actually by design in feudal nations, rather than just a rational by-product of the desitute poverty that the survival farmers lived in?

Anyways, as Panda Tse Tung has pointed out, the DPRK military largely engages in productive work, especially related to agriculture.

Also, if this starvation is by design (I'm assuming we are not going to talk about the embargo at all during this discussion? That isn't worthy of mention?), then why so late in their development?

The Famines as we know it began around 1992 I believe ( The USSR, their trading partner, was dismantled around 1991. Connection?) ; the DPRK was established in the late forties.

So. for the majority of their history to the present, the DPRK did not experience starvation, in fact initially in their development they had a stronger economy than the ROK to the South.

So why did they intend to introduce the famines as a measure of social control so late in the history of the DPRK? And why do these "Planned" famines coincide so nicely with the loss of trading partners, agricultural disasters and crippling economic sanctions placed on the DPRK by imperialist countries?

Even your thesis, that famine prevents uprisings, is actually not very acurate at all. In Haiti, the recent famines from the inflation of imported rice costs lead to riots in the island nation. In China there was mass starvation around the time of their revolution, as there was in the USSR in October of 1917.

Your thesis is Bullshit.


Just give it time, North Korea will inevitably collapse in on itself. And heck, maybe we can see some genuine Socialism arise in the process. This is what always happens; "leftists" like yourself get out the pom-poms and become cheerleaders for imperialism, because they actually have deluded themselves into thinking that regime change agitation in various countries, specifically countries that are in the cross-hairs of imperialist countries, will precipitate a socialist revolution.

This is what happened with Afghanistan in 2001, with Iraq in 2003, with Iran last summer... in 1990, there were "communist" forces applauding the break up of the former warsaw pact.

The promise is always that a socialist revolution, a revolution tailored more thoroughly to the specific prejudices of the beholder, will come out of this or that internal unrest/military occupation, etc.

But it never does. What always ends up happening is, in the midst of this tragic "divide and conquer", the imperialists get their way, and a state more pliable to their interests is established in that country.

If I had a dollar for every "Socialist" that has jumped on the bandwagon to take shots at any country that is already being crucified on the front page of the bourgeois rags, has thumbed their nose at a country that has already been slated for 'regime change' in the Pentagon, has played the role of the political 'left-wing' of jingoistic imperialist ambitions, I would pay my rent for a month or two at least.

Instead of periodic attacks on states that at least have a semblence of national soveriegnty and some vestiges of collective property, I would like to see more attacks on the imperialist powers themselves, rather than on their intended prey.

[it_ain't_me]

Of all of the places in the world that require revolution, why are you baying for the blood of the DPRK?

this, this, this.

[AK]

Of all of the places in the world that require revolution, why are you baying for the blood of the DPRK?
Because - believe it or not - there are exploited workers in the North, too.

[Adi Shankara]

Prairie fire, a sincere question for you: would you or would you not say there is a class division in North Korea between the workers, the party elite, and the military elite? would you agree or disagree with this following statement: "the quality of life for the party leaders and the Kim dynasty (the family of Kim Il Sung) is higher than the rest of North Korea on average; they have access to luxury items regular North Koreans will never have"?

I'm not trying to attack or anything, I just want to know your opinion on this.

[pranabjyoti]

Because - believe it or not - there are exploited workers in the North, too.
But I think there are workers in other part of the world, WHO ARE MORE EXPLOITED THAN THE WORKERS OF DPRK. At least I can say that no Bhopal has happened yet in DPRK.

[Tifosi]

But I think there are workers in other part of the world, WHO ARE MORE EXPLOITED THAN THE WORKERS OF DPRK. At least I can say that no Bhopal has happened yet in DPRK.

Well there are workers around the world that are more exploited than me here in the UK, I guess I should give up and go home:rolleyes:

[pranabjyoti]

Well there are workers around the world that are more exploited than me here in the UK, I guess I should give up and go home:rolleyes:
That's your problem. But, instead of concentrating on the worst part of the world, if you concentrate too much on the "benefit" of the workers of DPRK, I think you better stay home and THAT WILL BE THE BEST FOR MOST OF THE WORKERS OF THE WORLD.:lol:

[it_ain't_me]

I'm not sure what you mean by the charge that anarchist leftist ''are so much favored by imperialism''.

yeah...while i agreed with pranabjyoti's post for the most part, the snipe at anarchists (why anarchists? that seemed kind of out of the blue) was totally unfair and uncalled for. i actually removed my thanks when i reread the post and noticed that part at the end.

it's hard to see what imperialists gained from the 1999 WTO protests and other similar protests (of the last decade) which have nearly always had a large contingent of anarchists involved. i've met many anarchists, irl and online, who've had a favorable view of national liberation. at the very least, many of them are not dogmatic about rejecting national liberation struggles out of hand. left coms, on the other hand, while marxist, reject the very idea of national liberation. i really don't understand where the snipe against anarchists came from.

[Prairie Fire]

Alpha Kappa

Because - believe it or not - there are exploited workers in the North, too.

Holy shit, are you serious? Really?

You mean on a planet where there are currently no socialist states in existence, we have exploitation in every country on the planet Earth?

Wow, I had no idea.

:rolleyes:

Anyways, yes, thank you for pointing out the obvious. Where I'm not following you though, is how does this become a rationalization for imperialism? How does this become a rationalization for "regime change"?

There was exploitation in Iraq prior to 2003; there was exploitation in Afghanistan prior to 2001. There was exploitation in Haiti before 2004, in the former Yugoslavia prior to 1998....

Articulate your point to me.

Like so many of the infantile left, you also seem to possess the ability to see socialist revolutions on the horizon, when there are no signs in the material realities of the present.

Also, you are unable to make a class analysis of the forces in revolt when uprisings do happen, which is why the infantile left always ends up supporting domestic 'regime change' putschs that are more often than not engineered and bankrolled by the CIA.

This leads me to answer the next question:

Thomas Sankara

Because - believe it or not - there are exploited workers in the North, too.

Yes, of course there are class divisions in the DPRK, as there are in Cuba, in Venezuela,etc.

What confounds me is still why the DPRK, of all countries, should be first in line for revolution.

The DPRK, while it does possess exploitation (the rational result of incorporating domestic exploiter classes like the petty-bourgeoisie and national bourgeoisie into the make up of their "socialist" state), the DPRK is not an imperialist state. Their state policies only have consequences for their own population. This could also be said for Cuba.

The same goes for capitalist countries like Iran, like Belarus, like Zimbabwe; certainly they have class divisions, certainly they have the same system of exploitation enshrined as the rest of the world, but because these are countries that are governed by a defiant national bourgeoisie, and they do not exploit the working class or capital of other countries, at the very least the exploiters of these countries are only a thorn in the side of their domestic workingclass.

The United States of America, on the other hand... they are a thorn in the side of every worker on the face of the planet Earth. Their finance capital exploits the working class of all countries, their domestic and foriegn policies have consequences for the world proletariat.

The same goes for other imperialist countries: Canada, Britain, France, China, Russia, Germany, Japan, Australia, etc,etc.

At the very least, one must aknowledge that the DPRK is "Small potatoes" in the scheme of things.

I look at this issue, the same way I look at those who took part in the various demonstrations against the church of Scientology on the grounds of "anti-thiesm". Far be it from me to defend scientology, but where are the demonstrations against the Catholic Church, the Evangelical churches, etc?

As I said, "Small potatoes".

When the threat of aggressive imperialist exploitation is removed from the world stage, then we can start talking about what needs to be done in the non-imperialist countries.

Also, I am never too willing to denounce the foriegn policy adversary of the month; when your agenda is in perfect allignment with that of an aggressive imperialist power, that is generally a bad sign.

The DPRK, despite it's numerous short-comings (I have written extensively on the subject), still at least has national soveriegnty, is an anti-imperialist state, and has many vestiges of a socialist economy and collective modes of property ownership (more so than Cuba, Venezuela, or any other 'feel good' country that is drooled over on this forum).

I am not quick to denounce their nation building project at this time, especially when I can see no other state on the planet Earth at this time that has made more qualitative advances towards socialism.

As for the whole concept of "revolutions" that seem to occur in the foriegn policy adversaries of the United States... I would highly recommend that comrades do some studying on this subject. The case of Mosadeq in Iran is highly instructive on this subject.

[Dimentio]

Oh my god....

There is nothing aimless about it; the intended final outcome is the complete dismantling of any vestiges of common property and social ownership in the DPRK , and the subversion of that countries soveriegnty to imperialist interests.

A lot of nations have had public property without being socialist or worker-controlled. The question is not how the formal ownership is arranged, but for whose interests it are used. In the case of North Korea, no one could deny that the resource access is heavily slanted towards the authorities and the military. The idea about a socialist republic is really more propaganda than reality, and the reality is that North Korea is a more or less aristocratic monarchy.

I do not use to see these defenses towards Burma, which has a large state sector (like most military dictatorships). State ownership is not a guarantee of more progressiveness. The class which is in control in North Korea is a peculiar blend between the higher ranking officers and the state bureaucracy.

Sadly, socialism has been used as a very good excuse to establish strong bourgeois states in previously colonised nations, and to get money from the eastern bloc during the time of its existence. That is why everyone, including Nasser, Nehru, Nkrumah, Assad, Saddam and a lot of the strongmen of Asia and Africa claimed to be socialists (another reason is of course that socialism had a good reputation amongst the people as the socialists and communists were those who most bravely fought for the independence of their nations).

Socialism though, is not about a state exercising control over the means of production. I am not claiming that a centrally planned economy cannot work - Egypt worked for well over 3000 years under a centrally planned and regulated system - but that a centrally planned economy doesn't necessarily socialism bring.

In short, I am curious about how you define socialism.

[maskerade]

North Korea should be protected from imperialism. The North Korean people should also be protected from the authoritarian antics of Kim Jong Il and the obscure path he is taking the country down.

As revolutionary socialists we should fight all oppression, even in countries which are not imperialist. And I think someone would be very hard-pressed to support an argument claiming North Korea isn't an oppressive state. I would rather live in capitalist Sweden than North Korea, and I'm pretty sure everyone else on this forum would too.

[Adi Shankara]

Alpha Kappa


Holy shit, are you serious? Really?

You mean on a planet where there are currently no socialist states in existence, we have exploitation in every country on the planet Earth?

Wow, I had no idea.

:rolleyes:

Anyways, yes, thank you for pointing out the obvious. Where I'm not following you though, is how does this become a rationalization for imperialism? How does this become a rationalization for "regime change"?

There was exploitation in Iraq prior to 2003; there was exploitation in Afghanistan prior to 2001. There was exploitation in Haiti before 2004, in the former Yugoslavia prior to 1998....

Articulate your point to me.

Like so many of the infantile left, you also seem to possess the ability to see socialist revolutions on the horizon, when there are no signs in the material realities of the present.

Also, you are unable to make a class analysis of the forces in revolt when uprisings do happen, which is why the infantile left always ends up supporting domestic 'regime change' putschs that are more often than not engineered and bankrolled by the CIA.

This leads me to answer the next question:

Thomas Sankara


Yes, of course there are class divisions in the DPRK, as there are in Cuba, in Venezuela,etc.

What confounds me is still why the DPRK, of all countries, should be first in line for revolution.

The DPRK, while it does possess exploitation (the rational result of incorporating domestic exploiter classes like the petty-bourgeoisie and national bourgeoisie into the make up of their "socialist" state), the DPRK is not an imperialist state. Their state policies only have consequences for their own population. This could also be said for Cuba.

The same goes for capitalist countries like Iran, like Belarus, like Zimbabwe; certainly they have class divisions, certainly they have the same system of exploitation enshrined as the rest of the world, but because these are countries that are governed by a defiant national bourgeoisie, and they do not exploit the working class or capital of other countries, at the very least the exploiters of these countries are only a thorn in the side of their domestic workingclass.

The United States of America, on the other hand... they are a thorn in the side of every worker on the face of the planet Earth. Their finance capital exploits the working class of all countries, their domestic and foriegn policies have consequences for the world proletariat.

The same goes for other imperialist countries: Canada, Britain, France, China, Russia, Germany, Japan, Australia, etc,etc.

At the very least, one must aknowledge that the DPRK is "Small potatoes" in the scheme of things.

I look at this issue, the same way I look at those who took part in the various demonstrations against the church of Scientology on the grounds of "anti-thiesm". Far be it from me to defend scientology, but where are the demonstrations against the Catholic Church, the Evangelical churches, etc?

As I said, "Small potatoes".

When the threat of aggressive imperialist exploitation is removed from the world stage, then we can start talking about what needs to be done in the non-imperialist countries.

Also, I am never too willing to denounce the foriegn policy adversary of the month; when your agenda is in perfect allignment with that of an aggressive imperialist power, that is generally a bad sign.

The DPRK, despite it's numerous short-comings (I have written extensively on the subject), still at least has national soveriegnty, is an anti-imperialist state, and has many vestiges of a socialist economy and collective modes of property ownership (more so than Cuba, Venezuela, or any other 'feel good' country that is drooled over on this forum).

I am not quick to denounce their nation building project at this time, especially when I can see no other state on the planet Earth at this time that has made more qualitative advances towards socialism.

As for the whole concept of "revolutions" that seem to occur in the foriegn policy adversaries of the United States... I would highly recommend that comrades do some studying on this subject. The case of Mosadeq in Iran is highly instructive on this subject.

What about my other question: "Would you agree or disagree that the North Korean party/military elite and the Kim dynasty (Kim Il Sung's family/descendants) have a better quality of life than most North Koreans? yes or no?

[pranabjyoti]

North Korea should be protected from imperialism. The North Korean people should also be protected from the authoritarian antics of Kim Jong Il and the obscure path he is taking the country down.

As revolutionary socialists we should fight all oppression, even in countries which are not imperialist. And I think someone would be very hard-pressed to support an argument claiming North Korea isn't an oppressive state. I would rather live in capitalist Sweden than North Korea, and I'm pretty sure everyone else on this forum would too.
Certainly, because Sweden is not under an embargo for such a long time and there you don't have to fight imperialism with tooth and nails. This argument seems like "so much people are fleeing from socialist Cuba to the capitalist-imperialist USA, that proves that capitalism is better than socialism".

[Sam_b]

considering the media access the journalists received, I'm not about to accuse them of lying

So some of those documentaries about Iraq and Afghanistan...

[Adi Shankara]

So some of those documentaries about Iraq and Afghanistan...

but these journalists were cleared by the North Korean government themselves, and if you watch the documentary, you'll notice there is very little narration on what people say, and that the interviewees talk alot.

[AK]

But I think there are workers in other part of the world, WHO ARE MORE EXPLOITED THAN THE WORKERS OF DPRK. At least I can say that no Bhopal has happened yet in DPRK.
I never said that workers in the DPRK were more exploited or less exploited than others. I just said they were exploited.

[Wanted Man]

I would rather live in capitalist Sweden than North Korea, and I'm pretty sure everyone else on this forum would too.

Who cares where anybody on this forum would like to live?


according to the narrator in the documentary, it was filmed "100% with the full cooperation of North Korean authorities" so I'm assuming he's referring to NK state TV:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QSrcLC6Zz54

considering the media access the journalists received, I'm not about to accuse them of lying.

Check out the part where they're in the North Koreanclass room and the teacher says that Kim Jong Il can control the weather, and he is the fount of all revolutionary ideas--if that isn't a little something to be susceptible of, I don't know what is.

I've seen that documentary before. It's one of the better ones, actually. It was made by the BBC, and the "cooperation" thing probably refers to the BBC being allowed in to do so in the first place.

[Hiero]

I would rather live in capitalist Sweden than North Korea, and I'm pretty sure everyone else on this forum would too.

I would rather live in Hugh Hefners playboy mension then some shity anarchist commune...


Check out the part where they're in the North Koreanclass room and the teacher says that Kim Jong Il can control the weather, and he is the fount of all revolutionary ideas--if that isn't a little something to be susceptible of, I don't know what is.


National metaphors are contextual. When Mao said that woman hold up 50% of the sky, do you think that all Chinese people actually thought that the sky was a an object that woman and man actually had to hold up? Or that Mao was trying to trick Chinese people into believing that?

This is the typical approach learnt from imperialism, that beyond our borders exists not humans and inviduals, but the swarming mass. Believe it or not, North Koreans (or Koreans and Asians in general) are human beings with individual pyschology that make their own interpretations of their nationas metaphors. Unless you have proof that North Koreans are not taught the science of wheather, then it is just bizzare and a racist reading of North Koreans to assume that the DPRK government actually wants people to believe that Kim Jong Il controls the wheather.

[AK]

I would rather live in Hugh Hefners playboy mension then some shity anarchist commune...
Hey, at least we can spell and punctuate properly.

[4 Leaf Clover]

Who cares where anybody on this forum would like to live?



I've seen that documentary before. It's one of the better ones, actually. It was made by the BBC, and the "cooperation" thing probably refers to the BBC being allowed in to do so in the first place.

this documentary seems fake to me

like , mother explains children "yeah , take this glass , open this box in the cupboard" , like they are first time in their own house

and if they actually did give interviews wouldnt govrement find out and punish them ? :rolleyes:

edit: oh , the history class how did i miss that , now did they have to learn about dear leader exactely the day everything was filmed...

[maskerade]

Certainly, because Sweden is not under an embargo for such a long time and there you don't have to fight imperialism with tooth and nails. This argument seems like "so much people are fleeing from socialist Cuba to the capitalist-imperialist USA, that proves that capitalism is better than socialism".

Right. But I think all this North Korea praising is ridiculous. Yes, there is an embargo, and yea, there is an imperialist threat not many other countries face. But they would be much better off without Kim Jong il. And in practice, this North Korea defense serves only to discredit the left - Cuba has a crippling embargo against it as well, and it isn't nearly as bad as North Korea

[GreenCommunism]

cuba is not split in 2. and still in a war according to the treaty. cuba didn't have biological weapons used against it.

[maskerade]

cuba is not split in 2. and still in a war according to the treaty. cuba didn't have biological weapons used against it.

You do not need the absurd and extremely totalitarian leadership of Kim Jong il to deal with these problems. By all means, we should do everything we can to make the real causes of North Korea's economic position known: ie being the effect of American imperialism and sanctions. To use this to justify Kim Jong il and his leadership and the current structure and form of the North Korean government is ridiculous.

[Adi Shankara]

I prefer to avoid discussion of Korean related topics because it's the most divisive element in Communism today, those who think North Korea is a socialist state and those who think it is basically a monarchy, but I will ask any of you supporters of North Korea this:

do you or do you not think that Kim Jong Il and his family have a higher standard of living many times greater than the average Korean? do you or do you not think Kim Jong Il has privileges and luxuries that the average North Korean family could only dream of? Do you or do you not think that the Army and political classes get treated better than the workers and farmers, and have more opportunities?

a bit subjective, as I am biased (as we all are), but I just want to know what you'd have to say on this.

[maskerade]

I prefer to avoid discussion of Korean related topics because it's the most divisive element in Communism today, those who think North Korea is a socialist state and those who think it is basically a monarchy.

There are people who think North Korea is socialist? oh dear. I can understand supporting it's anti-imperialism, but can someone please explain how by any definition of socialism North Korea is socialist? The North Koreans have absolutely no involvement in their government.

[Adi Shankara]

There are people who think North Korea is socialist? oh dear. I can understand supporting it's anti-imperialism, but can someone please explain how by any definition of socialism North Korea is socialist? The North Koreans have absolutely no involvement in their government.

They really don't, hence why I believe it's a Monarchy...and to be honest, I have yet to see this notion be disproven.

1.) Kim Il Sung dies; power goes to Kim Jong Il (he certainly wasn't elected)

2.) Kim Jong Il's son, Kim Jong Un, is appearing on the ballot for the Supreme "People's" Assembly.

3.) North Korea officially abandons Communism completely, revises their constitution, removes all references to Communism (wonder how many know this? http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSSEO253213 http://en.apa.az/news.php?id=108293 --I don't like the patronizing tone of the first article, but the truth is, they did remove communism from the constitution)

EDIT: would you look at that, he even names his own son as his successor:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/article6412255.ece

[GreenCommunism]

yes, cuba is a monarchy too, look how Fidel handed the power to Raul. Even in cuba people in the communist party are much better off than the people who are not. the main question is always, up to what point.


You do not need the absurd and extremely totalitarian leadership of Kim Jong il to deal with these problems. By all means, we should do everything we can to make the real causes of North Korea's economic position known: ie being the effect of American imperialism and sanctions. To use this to justify Kim Jong il and his leadership and the current structure and form of the North Korean government is ridiculous.

i am not completly justifying it, however i really don't see how hard it is to think that the harsh condition it has gone through created an atmosphere in the government that this is the only way to survive.

some talk about race based nationalism in korea, well i used to be skeptical of it. but i think i somewhat agree. if any nation used biological warfare on my nation, i would succomb to the sin of racism and hate that country. i am not jesus christ. do you understand why china is so pissed at japan?

i am not a fortune teller, i can't know if north korea could survive without such a harsh regime, and you can't either. regimes who are too harsh usually fall exactly because they stepped the line at some point or run out of external ennemies to unite the people. the whole world being hostile to north korea only means that the leadership can blame the outsider for inside problems.

EDIT: would you look at that, he even names his own son as his successor:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle6412255.ece
there were always rumours about this, but man, south korean media. journalist are so full of shit. he could actually be training his kid to be the futur leader and told the press that he wish his kid to be the next leader if the will of the people decide so. but south korean media will make headlines saying that kim jung il designate his son as sucessor.

[pranabjyoti]

I never said that workers in the DPRK were more exploited or less exploited than others. I just said they were exploited.
Then who is the exploiter? The state i.e. THAT BLOODY STATE CAPITALISM.;)

[Adi Shankara]

bump

[Dimentio]

Well, formally Kim Jong-Il was elected by the central assembly, and Kim Jong-un will be elected as well. But the elections are not contested, and is a mere ritual intended to build up the legitimacy of the governing system. To call North Korea a republic is like calling the Roman Empire a republic since the Emperor was formally elected by the senate.

[Adi Shankara]

Well, formally Kim Jong-Il was elected by the central assembly, and Kim Jong-un will be elected as well. But the elections are not contested, and is a mere ritual intended to build up the legitimacy of the governing system. To call North Korea a republic is like calling the Roman Empire a republic since the Emperor was formally elected by the senate.

so would you agree that in all purposes, it's basically a monarchy in practice?

[Wanted Man]

Well, formally Kim Jong-Il was elected by the central assembly, and Kim Jong-un will be elected as well. But the elections are not contested, and is a mere ritual intended to build up the legitimacy of the governing system. To call North Korea a republic is like calling the Roman Empire a republic since the Emperor was formally elected by the senate.

Yes, but you think everything is like the Roman Empire.

[Adi Shankara]

Yes, but you think everything is like the Roman Empire.


The Roman empire is a pretty good analogy for everything that goes wrong in politics, whether it be imperialism, dictatorship, or the faillure of a class divided society...hence why I find it so funny that none of our politicians find nothing in common with Rome.

probably the only good thing about the Roman Empire was it fostered a rather intellectually open society, and racism was pretty rare.

[AK]

Then who is the exploiter? The state i.e. THAT BLOODY STATE CAPITALISM.;)
Yes actually. You're finally coming to your senses :)

[Soseloshvili]

I say that the reason North Korea has descended into totalitarianism is paranoia due to isolation. If someone extended a hand to the country, maybe it wouldn't be that way. Besides, the level of totalitarianism in NK is exaggerated. North Korea is a strict nation, with harsh punishments. But they don't purposefully starve their people, nor discriminate against people as is the case in the United States.

And as to the comments as to whether there are government crackdowns on leftist radicals, I'm watching it happen on the streets of Toronto as I write this. People are being arrested for no reason, simply for choosing to protest against G20. They weren't even being violent, and people are being detained in a blatant violation of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. They even briefly detained a Japanese Monk peacefully marching for world peace at the G8 meeting in Huntsville, just north.

[Adi Shankara]

I say that the reason North Korea has descended into totalitarianism is paranoia due to isolation. If someone extended a hand to the country, maybe it wouldn't be that way. Besides, the level of totalitarianism in NK is exaggerated. North Korea is a strict nation, with harsh punishments. But they don't purposefully starve their people, nor discriminate against people as is the case in the United States.


They don't discriminate against people!?!? :blink: did you know that in North Korea, if one's family participated in counter-revolutionary activities, then the entire family up to three generations can be punished for the offense? that only people with close ties to the party can live in Pyongyang? that some people are literally born into work camps and are worked like slave labor? this isn't just coming from "imperialist" sources.

[pranabjyoti]

Yes actually. You're finally coming to your senses :)
I can sense what you leftcoms want to say long ago. I myself at least in favor of STATE CAPITALISM because in that case, some part of the surplus value will return back to the workers. And it's on the ability of the working class that it can control the spending of this surplus for common good.

[AK]

I'm not a left communist.

[Chimurenga.]

They don't discriminate against people!?!? :blink: did you know that in North Korea, if one's family participated in counter-revolutionary activities, then the entire family up to three generations can be punished for the offense? that only people with close ties to the party can live in Pyongyang? that some people are literally born into work camps and are worked like slave labor? this isn't just coming from "imperialist" sources.

This is completely ridiculous.

[AK]

They don't discriminate against people!?!? :blink: did you know that in North Korea, if one's family participated in counter-revolutionary activities, then the entire family up to three generations can be punished for the offense? that only people with close ties to the party can live in Pyongyang? that some people are literally born into work camps and are worked like slave labor? this isn't just coming from "imperialist" sources.
So 3,260,000 people have close ties to the Party? Are you suggesting that all of Pyongyang is populated by high-ranking military officers and party bureaucrats? What, Kim Jong Il knows them all by name? Do they pop around for tea every now and then? Does the Party send them Christmas cards and lend them lawnmowers and power tools?

If these aren't right-wing sources, what are they?

[Zanthorus]

I can sense what you leftcoms want to say long ago. I myself at least in favor of STATE CAPITALISM because in that case, some part of the surplus value will return back to the workers. And it's on the ability of the working class that it can control the spending of this surplus for common good.

State capitalism is not necessarily the left communist position. Bordiga viewed Russia as simply capitalism, not too different from anywhere else.

In general as well, anarchists and Trotkyists who viewed Russia as "state-capitalist" had a perspective of Russia as some kind of abberation, whereas for the communist left state capitalism is not just an abberation but a tendency within world capitalism during the epoch of Imperialism.

[pranabjyoti]

State capitalism is not necessarily the left communist position. Bordiga viewed Russia as simply capitalism, not too different from anywhere else.

In general as well, anarchists and Trotkyists who viewed Russia as "state-capitalist" had a perspective of Russia as some kind of abberation, whereas for the communist left state capitalism is not just an abberation but a tendency within world capitalism during the epoch of Imperialism.
In my opinion we can call a country state-capitalist WHEN AND ONLY WHEN the surpluses of state owned industry is used for making the capitalists wealthy. As for example, in India, the ONGC (Oil and Natural Gas Corporation) is in search of finding oil and natural gas. But, when the found such reserves, the area will be handed over to capitalists for a low or moderate price. Recently, all the reserves found by ONGC is handed over to Reliance and other capitalist companies. THIS IS STATE CAPITALISM AT ITS WORST. The existence of the capitalist class is a MUST for state capitalism to exist.

[Adi Shankara]

So 3,260,000 people have close ties to the Party? Are you suggesting that all of Pyongyang is populated by high-ranking military officers and party bureaucrats? What, Kim Jong Il knows them all by name? Do they pop around for tea every now and then? Does the Party send them Christmas cards and lend them lawnmowers and power tools?

If these aren't right-wing sources, what are they?

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/dprk/2006/dprk-061010-voa03.htm

I don't see what would possibly make the article "imperialist source" (really sounds like the kind've cop out that they'd use at stormfront, except they call a source "jewish"--not saying you do that), so I'd hope you read it with an open mind.

from the article: "That loyalty [party ties] pays off in many ways. Aid workers report dire shortages of food and medicine in the North Korean countryside, but residents of the capital have privileged access to consumer goods such as packaged foods and washing machines.
Only those who hold high positions in the regime have access to the few motor vehicles - including some luxury cars - seen in Pyongyang. Residents also have access to better medical care.
At the clean and bustling 1,500-bed Pyongyang Maternity Hospital, administrators explain what a privilege it is for women to give birth here. Even residents of Pyongyang are only allowed to have their firstborn children in the facility."


I believe this article, because they get paid to create analysis, and I don't think their customers would like it if they lied to them or spread propaganda.

"...Only members of the loyal top class are allowed to live in the showcase capital city - mostly in towering, austere apartment blocks."

[Chimurenga.]

[/URL]Only those who hold high positions in the regime have access to the few motor vehicles - including some luxury cars - seen in Pyongyang.

Funny. I've never seen a "luxury" car in the DPRK. I guess every documentary and every picture taken conveniently left them out?


"...Only members of the loyal top class are allowed to live in the showcase capital city - mostly in towering, austere apartment blocks."

This is simply proven wrong by this documentary: [url]http://marxist-leninist-films.blogspot.com/2009/04/north-korea-day-in-life.html (http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/dprk/2006/dprk-061010-voa03.htm)

It's about a family who lives in Pyongyang. No member of the family is a "top ranking party official". This article is bogus.

[GreenCommunism]

well actually i've heard this it is true in north korea. i was very disgusted by it. then a croatian member of another communist board told us that it happened in other communist states too. it sort of gave me another reason to abandon defending stalinism.

[Walt]

So 3,260,000 people have close ties to the Party? Are you suggesting that all of Pyongyang is populated by high-ranking military officers and party bureaucrats? What, Kim Jong Il knows them all by name? Do they pop around for tea every now and then? Does the Party send them Christmas cards and lend them lawnmowers and power tools?

If these aren't right-wing sources, what are they?
The DPRK is a communist government, in order to run such a government, you would need "millions" of governmental workers, which is mostly what Pyongyang consists of.

Obviously it's simply western propaganda when an article goes to explain that all inhabitants of Pyongyang are government elites, because that' simply not true.

[AK]

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/dprk/2006/dprk-061010-voa03.htm

I don't see what would possibly make the article "imperialist source" (really sounds like the kind've cop out that they'd use at stormfront, except they call a source "jewish"--not saying you do that), so I'd hope you read it with an open mind.

from the article: "That loyalty [party ties] pays off in many ways. Aid workers report dire shortages of food and medicine in the North Korean countryside, but residents of the capital have privileged access to consumer goods such as packaged foods and washing machines.
Only those who hold high positions in the regime have access to the few motor vehicles - including some luxury cars - seen in Pyongyang. Residents also have access to better medical care.
At the clean and bustling 1,500-bed Pyongyang Maternity Hospital, administrators explain what a privilege it is for women to give birth here. Even residents of Pyongyang are only allowed to have their firstborn children in the facility."

I believe this article, because they get paid to create analysis, and I don't think their customers would like it if they lied to them or spread propaganda.

"...Only members of the loyal top class are allowed to live in the showcase capital city - mostly in towering, austere apartment blocks."
Trusting a website called "Global Security"... hmm... is that "Voice of America" I see at the top of the article?

North Korean society must've fucked up somewhere if there are 3,260,000 members of the upper class in a country with a population of 24,000,000. Somehow, I find that hard to believe.

[Hiero]

It is ridicilous how this articles always imply some oreintal depotism.

In the third world it is a social and historical reason for the inequalities between countryside and city. This isn't a result of some conspiracy, just a daily fact in most countries around the world including rich first world nations. I don't need an aritcle to reteirate the fact that people living in the city have better access to medical care.

It is also interesting how this aritcles work, and annoying how many people swallow it up. For instance they make the claim that people living in the cities enjoy a better life (this is not controversial at all) but make the claim without any proof that the reason being is because they are members of a "loyal class" with ties to the "party".

[Adi Shankara]

It is ridicilous how this articles always imply some oreintal depotism.

In the third world it is a social and historical reason for the inequalities between countryside and city. This isn't a result of some conspiracy, just a daily fact in most countries around the world including rich first world nations. I don't need an aritcle to reteirate the fact that people living in the city have better access to medical care.

[QUOTE=Hiero;1786558] it is also interesting how this aritcles work, and annoying how many people swallow it up..

I didn't swallow it up, I was just leaving it there for people interested in reading where I got what I said was all.

[Chambered Word]

National metaphors are contextual. When Mao said that woman hold up 50% of the sky, do you think that all Chinese people actually thought that the sky was a an object that woman and man actually had to hold up? Or that Mao was trying to trick Chinese people into believing that?

This is the typical approach learnt from imperialism, that beyond our borders exists not humans and inviduals, but the swarming mass. Believe it or not, North Koreans (or Koreans and Asians in general) are human beings with individual pyschology that make their own interpretations of their nationas metaphors. Unless you have proof that North Koreans are not taught the science of wheather, then it is just bizzare and a racist reading of North Koreans to assume that the DPRK government actually wants people to believe that Kim Jong Il controls the wheather.

Even if it is a metaphor - and I find that pretty hard to believe, really - it's still a very individualist and conservative metaphor to teach children. Why aren't they being taught to make their own decisions and think for themselves, that they can effect change collectively instead of relying on some glorious leader?

I obviously don't support North Korea but I can't believe half of the crazy shit I read about it...


I can sense what you leftcoms want to say long ago. I myself at least in favor of STATE CAPITALISM because in that case, some part of the surplus value will return back to the workers. And it's on the ability of the working class that it can control the spending of this surplus for common good.

There is a big difference between the state capitalism that Lenin spoke of and the versions of state capitalism that anarchists, leftcoms and Cliffite Trotskyists believe to exist, in that Lenin was talking about a state run by the working class using a capitalist mode of production (I think).