What's your opinion on Kim Jong Il's son most likely succeeding him?

[Adi Shankara]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/asia_pacific/10422809.stm

"...Leader Kim Jong-il is believed to be in ill health and grooming one of his sons, Kim Jong-un, to succeed him."

What's your opinion?

all I'm going to say is this: Kim Il Sung>Kim Jong Il>Kim Jong Un >Kim Un ???? :confused:

and no, I'm not trying to start a shitstorm, I really am curious to see what people think of this.

[fionntan]

One asshole dictator taken over from another..

[Chimurenga.]

If elected, Kim Jong-un will be faced with the same problems that surround the DPRK currently. I can only hope that he will be ready to lead. Regardless, the DPRK has my support.

[Admiral Swagmeister G-Funk]

What is my opinion? It does not surprise me, anybody could've guessed it. Looking at the dprk website, id say it would be a good guess to say that, whoever takes charge, free market investment will be on the agenda in NK.

[Chimurenga.]

free market investment will be on the agenda in NK.

This is still not certain.

[Admiral Swagmeister G-Funk]

True, but they're issuing business campaigns now to attract money. NK are pretty desperate under their current conditions.

[Adi Shankara]

True, but they're issuing business campaigns now to attract money. NK are pretty desperate under their current conditions.

But see, that is what I'm wondering--Why is it that in Cuba, there is no starving, and in fact, they eliminated malnutrition all together? Why can't NK follow the model layed down by Castro?

[Admiral Swagmeister G-Funk]

But see, that is what I'm wondering--Why is it that in Cuba, there is no starving, and in fact, they eliminated malnutrition all together? Why can't NK follow the model layed down by Castro?
Good question. Perhaps the conditions for food production are more difficult in NK than in Cuba. Also, I would imagine that Cuba shares better trade relationships with Latin American countries (venezuela etc) than NK does with its own neighbours.

[Chimurenga.]

But see, that is what I'm wondering--Why is it that in Cuba, there is no starving, and in fact, they eliminated malnutrition all together? Why can't NK follow the model layed down by Castro?

I believe that Cuba has more arable land and more popularity/support with surrounding countries than the DPRK.

[Adi Shankara]

I believe that Cuba has more arable land and more popularity/support with surrounding countries than the DPRK.

Not really, when you think about it; remember, they have a nation (the USA) only 80 miles away from them that has attempted to assassinate their leader 650 times (literally), has attempted to invade them more than once, an embargo from who should be their most important trade partner (such is the USA struggling to destroy the Cuban Revolution, hoping no one else will see how far they've come to succeed), and they're an island nation (at least North Korea shares a border with China, and China is a strong ally of North Korea--Cuba in the Caribbean has no real strong allies outside of Venezuela and I think the Dominican Republic).

I think it's safe to say that, without the USA there meddling in their affairs constantly, Cuba would be one of the most (human development wise) prosperous nations on earth.

[Weezer]

If elected, Kim Jong-un will be faced with the same problems that surround the DPRK currently. I can only hope that he will be ready to lead. Regardless, the DPRK has my support.

:confused:

Anyway, I suspect Kim Jong-Un will have some democratic and western reforms. If I remember right, he lived in Switzerland for awhile, but that's apparently a rumor

[piet11111]

So the third generation of scumbags is being prepped for "president" at what point can we call this an aristocracy ?

[Subcomandante Marcos.]

i would drop kick his punki ass like a nerf ball.

I defend North Korea in public, but i fucking despise Kim, i just want real socialism for the workers of NK.

Fuck Juche.

[mikelepore]

So the third generation of scumbags is being prepped for "president" at what point can we call this an aristocracy ?

I was going to use the word "emperor", but we're on the same wavelength here.

[Fietsketting]

I was going to use the word "emperor", but we're on the same wavelength here.


What i wonder about.. where are all the defenders of the Glorious Party Leadership? The other thread is full of em.

[Adi Shankara]

I was going to use the word "emperor", but we're on the same wavelength here.

Technically though, it'd be a Monarchy, since they don't rule over an empire.

[Chimurenga.]

Not really, when you
think about it; remember, they have a nation (the USA) only 80 miles away from them that has attempted to assassinate their leader 650 times (literally), has attempted to invade them more than once, an embargo from who should be their most important trade partner (such is the USA struggling to destroy the Cuban Revolution, hoping no one else will see how far they've come to succeed), and they're an island nation (at least North Korea shares a border with China, and China is a strong ally of North Korea--Cuba in the Caribbean has no real strong allies outside of Venezuela and I think the Dominican Republic).

I think it's safe to say that, without the USA there meddling in their affairs constantly, Cuba would be one of the most (human development wise) prosperous nations on earth.

You're forgetting that the heavy protection placed around Kim Il Sung and Kim Jong Il are to prevent anything like assassination attempts. The DPRK shares a boarder with Russia and is a hundred miles away from Japan. The DPRK also has it's own embargo from the US and Cuba still has rationing of their own.

[Palestine]

Technically though, it'd be a Monarchy, since they don't rule over an empire.

Japan has an emperor but is not an empire. Fucking Kims they are no communists they are more capitalist than the Bushs, what a fucking disgrace to communism, what a shame. That is true dictatorship, purest can be. I don't care in the name of what he does it, he should be overthrown.

[Sam_b]

Not really, when you think about it

Well yes really. China is not the hugest fan of the DPRK in reality and in the past has been critical of some of the practices of the country. I would further suggest that the hangover of the Korean war, which basically flattened huge areas of the north and cost millions of deaths (with obviously no effort by imperialist states to rebuild or repay aside from token EU aid gestures) had a much more adverse affect on DPRK as compared to the affects of the revolution in Cuba, which did not do nearly as much with consideration of destroying infrastructure.

As a mountanous country, as has been already said here, the amount of arable land is poor and can cause fluctuations in the success of crops. Some of the bigger famines at the start of the 1990s, which liberals are quick to accuse the DPRK of 'hoarding food for the elite' and 'self-starving the population' was actually a result of huge widespread failure in the crops. When you're isolated you can't just jump to your neighbours for food.

I'm not like some on here with their pretty strange uncritical supports of this so-called 'socialist' country, but it is important to distinguish reality from rhetoric and defend those who need defended.

[Subcomandante Marcos.]

Wow, a Socialist Workers Party member supporting the Kim Dynasty, i thought you guys were the UKs answer to anti stalinist politics, guess i was wrong.

[Adi Shankara]

I'm not like some on here with their pretty strange uncritical supports of this so-called 'socialist' country, but it is important to distinguish reality from rhetoric and defend those who need defended.

But see that's what bothers me on this forum; if you're critical of or dislike Kim Jong Il for being an absolute monarch, you get criticized as "capitalist", "anti-communist", or even "racist", when in fact it's the North Korean government that's all those things (except racist I would imagine). How many people know, afterall, that all references to communism have been removed from their constitution?

[Sam_b]

Wow, a Socialist Workers Party member supporting the Kim Dynasty, i thought you guys were the UKs answer to anti stalinist politics, guess i was wrong.

Point out exactly where I say I support the leadership of North Korea.

I won't hold my breath.

[Sam_b]

But see that's what bothers me on this forum; if you're critical of or dislike Kim Jong Il for being an absolute monarch, you get criticized as "capitalist", "anti-communist", or even "racist", when in fact it's the North Korean government that's all those things (except racist I would imagine). How many people know, afterall, that all references to communism have been removed from their constitution?

We don't defend North Korea because it is 'socialist' 'communist' or whatever. We defend North Korea from imperialism while calling for true worker's power in the state.

[Subcomandante Marcos.]

Support the workers, but denounce the Dynasty.

At the end of the day, i would rather live in europe than North Korea, due to the fact Kim's henchmen will pull your eyes out for looking at The communist Manifesto.

[the last donut of the night]

Support the workers, but denounce the Dynasty.

At the end of the day, i would rather live in europe than North Korea, due to the fact Kim's henchmen will pull your eyes out for looking at The communist Manifesto.

This of course, depends on who you are in Europe. I'm sure you wouldn't like to be a Roma girl (http://news.smh.com.au/world/sunbathers-ignore-dead-gypsy-girls-20080722-3j9x.html), for example. Europe can be a brutal, brutal place if you're not white and well-off.

[Subcomandante Marcos.]

I would rather be a black jewish marxist of the homosexual flare with a deep african accent and a wearer of kill cracker tshirt in europe, than be a korean in NK.

[Sam_b]

You're pretty much full of crap, aren't you?

[AK]

Wow, a Socialist Workers Party member supporting the Kim Dynasty, i thought you guys were the UKs answer to anti stalinist politics, guess i was wrong.
The vast majority of those who you consider to be defending the DPRK are not defending the Kims, the personality cults or the authoritarian nature of the rule of North Korea. They are merely supporting the workers and peasants of North Korea (usually done by condemning US imperialism and economic sanctions) - and hope that one day something better might replace the status quo.

[Dimentio]

But see, that is what I'm wondering--Why is it that in Cuba, there is no starving, and in fact, they eliminated malnutrition all together? Why can't NK follow the model layed down by Castro?

Because while Cuba is a dictatorship, its social composition make it unlikely for a dictatorship to last without popular participation, which make it somewhat less worse than the DPRK.

The DPRK has a class system with 51 classes, which really is more like a caste system where your "class" is inherited. Those who are at the top are of course (de-facto) Kim's family.

[gorillafuck]

North Korea is a military dictatorship. I don't see why people keep putting labels like "monarchy" and "dynasty" on it. It's a military dictatorship, not some bizarre blast from the past.

[it_ain't_me]

I would rather over and over and emphatically repeat that being a member of the west european labor aristocracy is comfier than being a citizen of a society which is a beleaguered victim of 50 years of western imperialism

a profound point. thanks for sharing.

[Subcomandante Marcos.]

and the reason north korea is such a horendous place to live is soley because of imperialism.

Yankee imperialism justifies gulags, torture, brainwashing, starvation, hereditary rule, fucking the workers worse than capitalists.

It is bullshit, Kim is worse than most liberal governments.

At l;east in europe, organising uprisings is possible, in North Korea, a workers uprising can never happen while Kim is in power.

[Sam_b]

Let's cheer on the tanks into Pyongyang!

[Subcomandante Marcos.]

a profound point. thanks for sharing.

Are you a third worldist anti communist idiot.

How the fuck are me, and the rest of the working class, part of a fucking labour aristocracy, you must be middle class, otherwise you would know the workers in europe don't have it so fucking easy.

You imbeciles who apparently think anyone not starving to death are labour aristocracy are just acting out of middle class white liberal guilt, it is completely devoid of class analysis, whats worse, you make the left look like a bunch of wankers, who most people, want to hit.

[Subcomandante Marcos.]

or do a SWP and call cops our workers in uniform, how about that.

[Subcomandante Marcos.]

Let's cheer on the tanks into Pyongyang!



If China was still maoist, i would support them overthrowing kim and giving the workers of NK and SK, the workers control of society as they and all workers deserve.

[thälmann]

calling north korea stalinist is really strange.stalin doesnt deserve it. they put away clearly all roots of marxism-leninism. that juche stuff has nothing to do with marxism.

[Sam_b]

or do a SWP and call cops our workers in uniform, how about that

Aah, just like earlier when you said I was supporting the 'Kim Dynasty', I asked you to prove it, and you couldn't!

Back this up with evidence.

[Sam_b]

Will that be a no, then?

[the last donut of the night]

I would rather be a black jewish marxist of the homosexual flare with a deep african accent and a wearer of kill cracker tshirt in europe, than be a korean in NK.

And you're sure of this because you've been both a "black jewish marxist of the homosexual flare with a deep african accent and a wearer of kill cracker tshirt" in Europe and a Korean in the DPRK in your lifetime? Geeze, why haven't you written an autobiography or something?!

[Dimentio]

North Korea is a military dictatorship. I don't see why people keep putting labels like "monarchy" and "dynasty" on it. It's a military dictatorship, not some bizarre blast from the past.

Most historical monarchies were military dictatorships in some form or another.

[it_ain't_me]

It is bullshit, Kim is worse than most liberal governments.

At l;east in europe, organising uprisings is possible, in North Korea, a workers uprising can never happen while Kim is in power.

so you condemn the dprk but at the same time say that it can't be overthrown by north koreans themselves. but you aren't arguing for imperialism. just trying to keep things straight.


whats worse, you make the left look like a bunch of wankers, who most people, want to hit.

''most people'', i.e. most members of the privileged labor aristocracy to which you are referring, favored the war on iraq and afghanistan. ''most people'', i.e. most members of the privileged labor aristocracy to which you are referring, favor the arizona anti-immigration law. ''most people'', i.e. most members of the privileged labor aristocracy to which you are referring, gobble up the reactionary propaganda of ''their own'' bourgeoisie's regarding foreign countries, and you are apparently no exception. :)

[AK]

@ it_ain't_me These are not explicitly characteristic of the masses which you collectively coin as the "labour aristocracy", they are characteristic of the social conditions in those countries.

''most people'', i.e. most members of the privileged labor aristocracy to which you are referring, favored the war on iraq and afghanistan.
You can't just pin this on the labour aristocracy; this is the fault of blinding nationalism and other propaganda promoting the right of and the supremacy of one people over another - which is endemic to every single country on earth.

The third world is also generally blinded by nationalism, but the only thing stopping third world states from waging imperialist wars of their own is the fact that most third world states are poor and could not stand up to the military might that is the United States war machine.

''most people'', i.e. most members of the privileged labor aristocracy to which you are referring, favor the arizona anti-immigration law. ''most people'', i.e. most members of the privileged labor aristocracy to which you are referring, gobble up the reactionary propaganda of ''their own'' bourgeoisie's regarding foreign countries, and you are apparently no exception. :)
Again, this is the fault of all the bullshit propaganda spewed out by the ruling class. Quit your *****in'. You also seem to view the "labour aristocracy" as a mass of individuals which cannot be cured of their ailment and will be inherently reactionary, yet, I was cured of it.

[Adi Shankara]

North Korea is a military dictatorship. I don't see why people keep putting labels like "monarchy" and "dynasty" on it. It's a military dictatorship, not some bizarre blast from the past.

Let's see: Kim Il Sung takes power. Kim Il Sung dies, Kim Jong Il takes power.

Kim Jong Il will die soon, he has chosen his son to take his place upon death.

if that isn't a monarchy, I don't know what it is.

[it_ain't_me]

You also seem to view the "labour aristocracy" as a mass of individuals which cannot be cured of their ailment and will be inherently reactionary, yet, I was cured of it.

no, i don't seem to view them that way (or i wouldn't be a socialist). you seem to have read that into my statements, actually.

[AK]

no, i don't seem to view them that way (or i wouldn't be a socialist). you seem to have read that into my statements, actually.
Well that's what I got from your post.

[GreenCommunism]

Let's see: Kim Il Sung takes power. Kim Il Sung dies, Kim Jong Il takes power.

Kim Jong Il will die soon, he has chosen his son to take his place upon death.

if that isn't a monarchy, I don't know what it is.
condemn cuba for choosing fidel's brother as new leader or be branded as a hypocrit.

Labour aristocracy means you are bought by the bourgeois and afforded comfortable lives so you more easily believe propaganda to wage wars on other countries since your interest as a class is clearly to pursue those wars. some may disagree but, but in the 1850s people in the west were proletariat, after the 1960s people in the west are labour aristocracy.

[The Ben G]

There needs to be an uprising in the DPRK. I can't believe how they allow this crap to happen.

[scarletghoul]

There's uhhh so much crap in this thread

[AK]

There's uhhh so much crap in this thread
Any thread on the DPRK, Stalin, Trotsky, Vanguardism, Venezuela/Chavez, Cuba, Nepalese Maoists or the Naxalites ends up the same way.

[Dimentio]

condemn cuba for choosing fidel's brother as new leader or be branded as a hypocrit.

Labour aristocracy means you are bought by the bourgeois and afforded comfortable lives so you more easily believe propaganda to wage wars on other countries since your interest as a class is clearly to pursue those wars. some may disagree but, but in the 1850s people in the west were proletariat, after the 1960s people in the west are labour aristocracy.

Monarchy should not be condemned in itself. Most people here condemn North Korea for the proto-fascist Songun policy which is exploiting the people in order to enstrengthen the army and the officer's caste. North Korea is more similar than Burma than Cuba in this aspect.

[Demogorgon]

This proves the glorious nature of the democratic dictatorship of the workers and peasants in North Korea that the masses unanimously rise up and demand the son and Grandson of former leaders. Surely this proves they are happy with what they have!

Seriously, can we please drop the pretences about this dictatorship? In every concrete way it has one of the most right wing Governments on earth. Dimentio is absolutely right to compare it with Burma. The difference being North Korea is even worse.
Most historical monarchies were military dictatorships in some form or another.
I'm not sure you can make a direct comparison. Feudalism worked quite differently as there was not centralised military control. It is best to understand North Korea as a Military Dictatorship with elements of feudalism involved. The ultra hierarchical nature of the society and de facto caste system as well as the hereditary nature of the leadership are drawn from feudalism, but I think the strongest feature is rule by the (modern in organisation) army.

[Dimentio]

This proves the glorious nature of the democratic dictatorship of the workers and peasants in North Korea that the masses unanimously rise up and demand the son and Grandson of former leaders. Surely this proves they are happy with what they have!

Seriously, can we please drop the pretences about this dictatorship? In every concrete way it has one of the most right wing Governments on earth. Dimentio is absolutely right to compare it with Burma. The difference being North Korea is even worse.
I'm not sure you can make a direct comparison. Feudalism worked quite differently as there was not centralised military control. It is best to understand North Korea as a Military Dictatorship with elements of feudalism involved. The ultra hierarchical nature of the society and de facto caste system as well as the hereditary nature of the leadership are drawn from feudalism, but I think the strongest feature is rule by the (modern in organisation) army.

Feudalism is in fact a military dictatorship in a very crude form. It was established from the 8th century and onward given that the silver and gold mines of the Middle East were moved from Roman to Islamic control, which suddenly decreased the access to silver for the kingdoms of western Europe, forcing the kings to pay their officers in land instead. Only a few centuries earlier, most Germanic kingdoms had been ruled by remnants of the Western Roman Army (which mainly consisted of Germanic immigrants and the descendants of such immigrants) which had been more or less professionalised.

It could be compared to some countries in Africa today, where the lack of means to supply their armies has meant that the armies have been forced to find ways to pay for themselves, often occupying parts of their own countries to extract direct taxation from the inhabitants of their regions, or trading with rebel groups and splinter factions from the military of other countries.

[piet11111]

North Korea is a military dictatorship. I don't see why people keep putting labels like "monarchy" and "dynasty" on it. It's a military dictatorship, not some bizarre blast from the past.

True but in what kind of military dictatorship is the role of leader passed on from father to son ?

[AK]

True but in what kind of military dictatorship is the role of leader passed on from father to son ?
Maybe one in which the son was second in command?

If this is actually true for NK, I have no clue and I can't be stuffed finding out. But it answered your question.

[scarletghoul]

Hate quoting myself but this is from the other thread (similar to this but with a much less sensationalist and silly title + OP)

I don't get why everyone's jumping to conclusions that his son is being made his successor, he's not yet in any position high enough to be made a top government leader. If KJI died tomorrow, certainly someone other than his son would replace him. The media just jumped on any mention of his son, assuming that he is being made into the next leader. In fact that has nowhere been confirmed and KJU is not a prominant figure at all (they still don't have any photographs of him over the age of like 10..). Certainly he is being secured a place in the government, but he has yet to rise up the Party hierarchy enough to be considered as a successor. Maybe in 5 or 10 years, but right now it's impossible to say.

[Fietsketting]

True but in what kind of military dictatorship is the role of leader passed on from father to son ?

A long militairy dictatorship. ;)

[28350]

Personally I love Kim Jong Il but hate North Korea.

[scarletghoul]

Any thread on the DPRK, Stalin, Trotsky, Vanguardism, Venezuela/Chavez, Cuba, Nepalese Maoists or the Naxalites ends up the same way.
So any discussion with relevence to international socialism then ? :lol:

[Hiratsuka]

Personally I love Kim Jong Il but hate North Korea.


...Kay.

[The Ben G]

Personally I love Kim Jong Il but hate North Korea.

The Kims are the reason that the DPRK is like this. The DPRK has a lot of potential, but it needs to get rid of the monarchism and the totalitarian sense of the state.

[Palestine]

Personally I love Kim Jong Il but hate North Korea.

With all do respect this the most retarded thing to say.
Kim Jong Il is no different than Saddam Hussein, Fulgencio Batista, The Tzar of Russia, or any Arab dictator, he thinks he owns the country, the country belongs to its people not to the Kims dynasty. Fuck them trying to ruin the workers life with making them live in fear of imperialisms to rule, Or if they oppose the government get sent to labor camps. He should go and change his ideology because that is not communism. Kim Jong Il is a fascist, leading a fascist regime against his own people.

[it_ain't_me]

some of you folks are rather easy to troll

[Adi Shankara]

Lets just look at facts, for the record:

FACT: North Korea actually has written in it's constitution that Kim Il Sung and his descendants is integral to the state--this is almost antithetical to communism

FACT: North Korea has a strict caste system that consists of military, politicians, laborers, and "reactionaries", which is basically anyone who the Kim monarchy doesn't like.

FACT: Kim Jong Il lives in absolute luxury while his people face famine year after year, as proof by his 800,000 dollar spending on cognac; it became so bad, the UN had to impose luxury good sanctions on North Korea.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6278299&from=mobile

[Hiratsuka]

FACT: North Korea actually has written in it's constitution that Kim Il Sung and his descendants is integral to the state--this is almost antithetical to communismAlmost? It is antithetical to communism, and the only reason North Korea ever gets a pass for their bullshit policies is because certain leftists with weak knees and perhaps a little shade of liberal white guilt don't want to come off sounding like imperialist apologists. In reality, if even half of this shit went down in the UK, Ireland, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, Singapore, or the United States*, we wouldn't be debating the finer details about whether it constitutes a monarchy or military junta. It's distasteful as fuck to think that North Koreans "must" be propagandized with prophetic messages about the Kims because of the American embargo. Users need to stop absolving the North Korean piggish leadership of their atrocities. If it were the 1930s and the roles reversed, some RevLeft could just twist this line of thought into arguing that Hitler's actions are just a "necessary response" to French and British imperialism (Godwin's law be damned).


* Predominantly English-speaking forum, predominantly English-speaking areas.

[Admiral Swagmeister G-Funk]

Lets just look at facts, for the record:

FACT: North Korea actually has written in it's constitution that Kim Il Sung and his descendants is integral to the state--this is almost antithetical to communism

FACT: North Korea has a strict caste system that consists of military, politicians, laborers, and "reactionaries", which is basically anyone who the Kim monarchy doesn't like.

FACT: Kim Jong Il lives in absolute luxury while his people face famine year after year, as proof by his 800,000 dollar spending on cognac; it became so bad, the UN had to impose luxury good sanctions on North Korea.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6278299&from=mobile

Firstly, please stop using the cognac story, its a load of bullshit.

Secondly, what is your point? We know that Kim Jong-Il is a shit, NK even denounced Marxism-Leninism.

What are you trying to say here?

[Adi Shankara]

Firstly, please stop using the cognac story, its a load of bullshit.


Really? how so? I think the fact that the UN actually has to go to the lengths of imposing a luxury ban speaks volumes. It shows he uses the name of communism to give himself unprecedented wealth.

now care to counter me on how it's bullshit?

[Adi Shankara]

http://www.spiegel.de/international/spiegel/0,1518,444303,00.html

Here is another article where the little shit is ordering thousands of euros worth of luxury vehicles.

[Adi Shankara]

Almost? It is antithetical to communism, and the only reason North Korea ever gets a pass for their bullshit policies is because certain leftists with weak knees and perhaps a little shade of liberal white guilt don't want to come off sounding like imperialist apologists. In reality, if even half of this shit went down in the UK, Ireland, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, Singapore, or the United States*, we wouldn't be debating the finer details about whether it constitutes a monarchy or military junta. It's distasteful as fuck to think that North Koreans "must" be propagandized with prophetic messages about the Kims because of the American embargo. Users need to stop absolving the North Korean piggish leadership of their atrocities.


* Predominantly English-speaking forum, predominantly English-speaking areas.

Actually, if you want my complete honest opinion...I think the only reason why people defend Kim Jong Il, is they hear the patriotic music, see the murals, and go "that's so cool, he has to be awesome!"

I find it ironic so many of his supporters are atheists--they say they don't buy into religion...

[Dimentio]

The interesting thing is the few users here who claim that DPRK is a bastion of socialism and progress which needs to be defended.

[Subcomandante Marcos.]

condemn cuba for choosing fidel's brother as new leader or be branded as a hypocrit.

Labour aristocracy means you are bought by the bourgeois and afforded comfortable lives so you more easily believe propaganda to wage wars on other countries since your interest as a class is clearly to pursue those wars. some may disagree but, but in the 1850s people in the west were proletariat, after the 1960s people in the west are labour aristocracy.

No because raul was always second in command, he was marxist before the revolution was, and was an outstanding leader, though during the revolution, he did not see much action due to being given the area of las villas (if i got it wrong please give me the right name) where fighting wasn't as heavy.

He was second as he was the second in command when the revolution was being organised, he wasn't second in command just because of fidel.

[Adi Shankara]

No because raul was always second in command, he was marxist before the revolution was, and was an outstanding leader, though during the revolution, he did not see much action due to being given the area of las villas (if i got it wrong please give me the right name) where fighting wasn't as heavy.

He was second as he was the second in command when the revolution was being organised, he wasn't second in command just because of fidel.

Exactly, couldn't have said it better myself, and in fact, he did see much fighting--he was one of the original commandos on Granma, and he commanded troops in the revolution in the province of Oriente--Raul Castro shouldn't have to defend his record, he has a proven commitment to the Cuban revolution, and risked his life many times during the war against Batista--what has Kim Jong Il's son done, except be born and spending most of his life in Switzerland?

[Admiral Swagmeister G-Funk]

Really? how so? I think the fact that the UN actually has to go to the lengths of imposing a luxury ban speaks volumes. It shows he uses the name of communism to give himself unprecedented wealth.

now care to counter me on how it's bullshit?
There is nothing in their constitution about communism. And what proof have you got?

You also failed to answer my other questions.

[Adi Shankara]

There is nothing in their constitution about communism. And what proof have you got?

You also failed to answer my other questions.

That's what I said. there is nothing in their constitution about communism. there was, but they removed all references.

thanks for being redundant.

[Admiral Swagmeister G-Funk]

That's what I said. there is nothing in their constitution about communism. there was, but they removed all references.

thanks for being redundant.
Selective reading much? LOLskies.

[Fietsketting]

The interesting thing is the few users here who claim that DPRK is a bastion of socialism and progress which needs to be defended.

They are in that other topic (http://www.revleft.com/vb/n-korea-seeks-t137532/index.html) and refuse to come here to get hammered down on the fact there supporting a militairy dictatorship under the flag of socialism and are okay with that. ;)

[Admiral Swagmeister G-Funk]

But most people don't support NK at all, they just understand their right to seek compensation from crimes of imperialism.

Most of us understand that NK is a shit hole with a shitty leader, but many folk on here see that any defence for them (against imperialism, our great enemy) is a defence of the dictatorship. NK doesn't even operate under the banner of Marxism in the first place!

[Adi Shankara]

Selective reading much? LOLskies.

Nice attempt to distract with semantics: what question didn't I answer? you're worse than the delusional skinhead idiots who, when caught with their pants down, accuse you of not responding to phantom questions they never asked.

[Adi Shankara]

But most people don't support NK at all, they just understand their right to seek compensation from crimes of imperialism.

Most of us understand that NK is a shit hole with a shitty leader, but many folk on here see that any defence for them (against imperialism, our great enemy) is a defence of the dictatorship. NK doesn't even operate under the banner of Marxism in the first place!

Therefore, you should advocate the overthrowing of the state in favor of a new worker state. it's not all black and white.

[Admiral Swagmeister G-Funk]

Nice attempt to distract with semantics: what question didn't I answer? you're worse than the delusional skinhead idiots who, when caught with their pants down, accuse you of not responding to phantom questions they never asked.
What the hell kind of argument is that?

I said, what is the proof of Kim Jong-Il's purchase of massive amounts of Hennessy and how this affects the NK economy, other than a WP source which in my opinion, wouldn't count.

I also asked what the point of your stance is? Hardly anyone is defending Kim or NK, people just recognize their right to demand compensation, what is so difficult about that for you to understand?

[Adi Shankara]

What the hell kind of argument is that?

I said, what is the proof of Kim Jong-Il's purchase of massive amounts of Hennessy and how this affects the NK economy, other than a WP source which in my opinion, wouldn't count.

read the article: the quote comes directly from Hennessy, a French company, not an American one. why would they lie about their figures? what gain would they have to make?


I also asked what the point of your stance is? Hardly anyone is defending Kim or NK, people just recognize their right to demand compensation, what is so difficult about that for you to understand?

My stance is your reasons for protecting dictatorship ("it's better than a US occupied state") are pathetic.

[Fietsketting]

But most people don't support NK at all, they just understand their right to seek compensation from crimes of imperialism.

Most of us understand that NK is a shit hole with a shitty leader, but many folk on here see that any defence for them (against imperialism, our great enemy) is a defence of the dictatorship. NK doesn't even operate under the banner of Marxism in the first place!

And you shouldn't ally with dictators in any way or form either but if its against imperialism we side with everyone right? The way korea is being run goes against all your principles and yet your supporting there action. Why wouldn't you want to liberate the actual workingclass instead of giving indirect support to a dictator who's family rule the country as a king?

And, on top of that, although thats in my case. I don't support states anyhow ;)

[Admiral Swagmeister G-Funk]

read the article: the quote comes directly from Hennessy, a French company, not an American one. why would they lie about their figures? what gain would they have to make?



My stance is your reasons for protecting dictatorship ("it's better than a US occupied state") are pathetic.
Okay so they purchased a lot of Hennessy, I still don't understand your point as to how this relates to the social conditions in NK, and how it is a reason for us NOT to defend NK's right to demand compensation. Also, where have I said that I think NK is "better than a US occupied state"? I just understand their right to demand compensation, as they have been victims of imperialism for many years.

NK has a shitty regime, largely in part a result of imperialism. If NK hadn't been so aggressively isolated, their people would be much better off.

[Admiral Swagmeister G-Funk]

And you shouldn't ally with dictators in any way or form either but if its against imperialism we side with everyone right? The way korea is being run goes against all your principles and yet your supporting there action. Why wouldn't you want to liberate the actual workingclass instead of giving indirect support to a dictator who's family rule the country as a king?

And, on top of that, although thats in my case. I don't support states anyhow ;)
I'm not allying with any dictators, I'm acknowledging the state's right to demand compensation from imperialist nations. What do you think the conditions are for working class liberation are in NK? We are not in a position to deny NK this right, sitting on our computers, comfortably in the west. We are not in a set of conditions that require us to seek compensation for the rape and pillage of our nation for 60 years etc.

[Adi Shankara]

Okay so they [Kim Jong Il] purchased a lot of Hennessy, I still don't understand your point as to how this relates to the social conditions in NK, and how it is a reason for us NOT to defend NK's right to demand compensation.

There is so much wrong with this post, I don't even know where to begin. Am I the only one who sees something wrong here?

[Fietsketting]

I'm not allying with any dictators, I'm acknowledging the state's right to demand compensation from imperialist nations. What do you think the conditions are for working class liberation are in NK? We are not in a position to deny NK this right, sitting on our computers, comfortably in the west. We are not in a set of conditions that require us to seek compensation for the rape and pillage of our nation for 60 years etc.

Your giving indirect support to the nation of North Korea on the subject of the compensation from western imperialism. Fine. But by supporting that state you indirectly support the leadership of this same state. And that is not the dicatorship of the Proletariat but that of a selfproclaimed Great Eternal Leader!

Same as walking in a demo against Israëli imperialism but where Hamas militants are shouting that all jews must be wiped from the earth. Would you stay? I haven't. Just cause we're against Imperialism of any kind does that not mean we have to indirectly support regimes like that.

[Admiral Swagmeister G-Funk]

There is so much wrong with this post, I don't even know where to begin. Am I the only one who sees something wrong here?
Please, begin.

NK's purchase of Hennessy is disproportionate to the amount of economic/social damage that imperialism has inflicted on NK citizens. NK have the right to demand compensation, Hennessy has very little to do with this and you are in no position to deny them that right.

NK has a shitty dictatorship, granted. NK also has a right to demand compensation. In the same way that Iraqi, Afghani citizens do etc.,granted. Who are you to deny them this right? Or maybe you can go and overthrow the Kim dictatorship, as its such an easy task.

[Admiral Swagmeister G-Funk]

Your giving indirect support to the nation of North Korea on the subject of the compensation from western imperialism. Fine. But by supporting that state you indirectly support the leadership of this same state. And that is not the dicatorship of the Proletariat but that of a selfproclaimed Great Eternal Leader!

Same as walking in a demo against Israëli imperialism but where Hamas militants are shouting that all jews must be wiped from the earth. Would you stay? I haven't. Just cause we're against Imperialism of any kind does that not mean we have to indirectly support regimes like that.
I'm not defending the state, I'm defending the people of NK. They are the ones who have suffered at the hands of Imperialism, I cannot deny NK the right to demand compensation on the basis of the workers in NK.

If we could all go to NK, get the workers on our side and overthrow the dictatorship then this would be a different story, but I think you are too blinded by your complete anti-statist ideology to even sympathize with the objective social conditions of the NK workers.

[Adi Shankara]

Please, begin.

NK's purchase of Hennessy is disproportionate to the amount of economic/social damage that imperialism has inflicted on NK citizens. NK have the right to demand compensation, Hennessy has very little to do with this and you are in no position to deny them that right.

NK has a shitty dictatorship, granted. NK also has a right to demand compensation. In the same way that Iraqi, Afghani citizens do etc.,granted. Who are you to deny them this right? Or maybe you can go and overthrow the Kim dictatorship, as its such an easy task.

You want to give more money to a shitty failed monarchy, so that the ruler can buy even more hennessy.

that money belongs to the people of North Korea, not some little fat piece of shit who deserves a bullet in his skull.

[Subcomandante Marcos.]

But the compensation won't go to the workers, it will provide new weapons for the army, better surveilence for the secret police, more Hennesy for old Kim, More feasts for party elite, more stations on the borders to stop escape, more money to kill handicapped children, have you not noticed that you never see one handicapped person, one person in a wheelchair, they deny killing them, but, where the fuck are they, the money will fund the running of gulags, will fund the building of statues, paintings monuments and museums to show the heroic divine dear leader.

Fuck Kim, he is like george bush, but without the ranch, instead he has a fucking palace and appears to have won a lifes suply of Hennesy on bullseye.

[Admiral Swagmeister G-Funk]

You want to give more money to a shitty failed monarchy, so that the ruler can buy even more hennessy.

that money belongs to the people of North Korea, not some little fat piece of shit who deserves a bullet in his skull.
No, I don't want to give money to the monarchy. But I don't think that there's any way we can rightly say that all of that compensation will be spent on Kim's choices of beverage.

The fact here is, the more food that is in NK, the more food that the workers will eat. We both do not like the state, but the Korean conditions as it stands do not seem very revolutionary to me, perhaps the prospects for revolution will be more ripe when the NK people can actually eat.

[Admiral Swagmeister G-Funk]

But the compensation won't go to the workers, it will provide new weapons for the army, better surveilence for the secret police, more Hennesy for old Kim, More feasts for party elite, more stations on the borders to stop escape, more money to kill handicapped children, have you not noticed that you never see one handicapped person, one person in a wheelchair, they deny killing them, but, where the fuck are they, the money will fund the running of gulags, will fund the building of statues, paintings monuments and museums to show the heroic divine dear leader.

Fuck Kim, he is like george bush, but without the ranch, instead he has a fucking palace and appears to have won a lifes suply of Hennesy on bullseye.
I think that this is quite a naive view. Have you been to NK? I haven't, all I have seen on the subject are documentaries by hard-line capitalists and right-wing news sources.

I think that the people would be largely more well fed if NK were to get some compensation, then I think that the prospects for their own liberation would be more likely. As it stands they are a starving people, cut off from the world and shunned off by both sides of the political line.

[Fietsketting]

.

The fact here is, the more food that is in NK, the more food that the workers will eat. We both do not like the state, but the Korean conditions as it stands do not seem very revolutionary to me, perhaps the prospects for revolution will be more ripe when the NK people can actually eat.


Several revolutions started by a shortage of bread tho.

[Subcomandante Marcos.]

the money will strenghen the secret police and army, revolution would be impossible.

[Admiral Swagmeister G-Funk]

The money would also strengthen the people, plus masses are stronger than any army should their consciousness be right.

I'd like to ask what the people I am arguing with here are proposing on the NK question, regarding compensation from imperialists?

[Fietsketting]

the money will strenghen the secret police and army, revolution would be impossible.
But the US won't pay anyhow. They rather use it for there imperialist wars to secure the raw materials to keep there economy going.

[peaccenicked]

Why is revolution on the agenda? Whose agenda? The death of a single dictator may bring some change but it does not indicate a revolutionary situation.

[Subcomandante Marcos.]

revolution isn't on the table, North Korea has a fist around the balls of the workers, so tight, it makes a nuns arse look like the grand canyon.

Thats the problem, the situation is hopeless.

it is harder to have a revolution in NK than in any european country, because though we are exploited, due to workers struggles, we have some room to agitate and some rights that if taken away, would result in very violent reactions.

North Korea is just too 1984 to even talk about overthrowing the state.

[AK]

The Kims are the reason that the DPRK is like this. The DPRK has a lot of potential, but it needs to get rid of the monarchism and the totalitarian sense of the state.
Economic sanctions also played a pretty damned huge part...

[Hiratsuka]

The money would also strengthen the people, plus masses are stronger than any army should their consciousness be right.

I'd like to ask what the people I am arguing with here are proposing on the NK question, regarding compensation from imperialists?

Will Russia be paying reparations to South Korea? All of the complaints submitted thus far have only been against the United States. What about the UK? New Zealand? Australia? Thailand? South Africa? Do they pay "only" forty trillion? You seem to be operating under the presumption that imperialism is some monolithic entity invented by the United States.

Lest we forget, it was the North that invaded the South under the same phony pretenses that the United States used to expand their operations in Vietnam. True, Truman's administration remained silent on the question of Korea's sovereignty, but how quickly some seem to forget that the North once had Soviets trying to pull its strings. The Korean War was not a simple subject of "evil American dogs" trying to push their thumb down on Asia just for the sake of it. The Soviets and Americans were both playing with fire and stamping a single political label on a people whose beliefs were as diverse as any other.

To be perfectly honest, I think if the US pays out reparations, it should first go to the Middle East, and then Vietnam, and then maybe North Korea once the toads are removed from the top (and once Russia agrees to join the poker table).

[Subcomandante Marcos.]

fuck off reactionary, go back to reactionland, reactionvulle, 88 reaction street

[AK]

^ lolwut. Somehow, Marcos, I think you're wrong.

To be perfectly honest, I think if the US pays out reparations, it should first go to the Middle East, and then Vietnam, and then maybe North Korea once the toads are removed from the top (and once Russia agrees to join the poker table).
That's a pretty big "if". The US government is having enough trouble with it's debt already.

[Sam_b]

I'm still waiting for Subcomandante Marcos to post his evidence as to why the SWP regard the police as 'workers in uniform'.

Or is he all mouth and can't back up anything he says?

[AK]

I'm still waiting for Subcomandante Marcos to post his evidence as to why the SWP regard the police as 'workers in uniform'.

Or is he all mouth and can't back up anything he says?
All I can find through Google searches is that some SP member claimed that cops were workers in uniform.

[Admiral Swagmeister G-Funk]

Will Russia be paying reparations to South Korea? All of the complaints submitted thus far have only been against the United States. What about the UK? New Zealand? Australia? Thailand? South Africa? Do they pay "only" forty trillion? You seem to be operating under the presumption that imperialism is some monolithic entity invented by the United States.

Lest we forget, it was the North that invaded the South under the same phony pretenses that the United States used to expand their operations in Vietnam. True, Truman's administration remained silent on the question of Korea's sovereignty, but how quickly some seem to forget that the North once had Soviets trying to pull its strings. The Vietnam War was not a simple subject of "evil American dogs" trying to push their thumb down on Asia just for the sake of it. The Soviets and Americans were both playing with fire and stamping a single political label on a people whose beliefs were as diverse as any other.

To be perfectly honest, I think if the US pays out reparations, it should first go to the Middle East, and then Vietnam, and then maybe North Korea once the toads are removed from the top (and once Russia agrees to join the poker table).
Those are some great points, which I respect. However my original position, and my current position is only that I respect NK's wishes to seek compensation. I am not defending their politics, but their justification for asking for compensation, exactly the same as the Middle-East, if they wished to demand payment for the damage done to their people (i.e. sanctions against Israel, a lifting of the blockade at Gaza). They have a justifiable right to demand these things, just like you can demand that someone fixes your door after they smash it in.

Nothing can really justify the years of economic isolation of NK, other than from an imperialistic point of view and I defend NK's, the Middle-East's, Iraq's, Afghanistan's and many other victims of imperialism's "right" to claim compensation from the imperial powers. Not because of their systems or whatever, but the damage that has been done to the people. If I was a NK citizen, or an Iraqi citizen, or a Palestinian, I would definitely support a demand for compensation in consideration of my people.

This is not a defence of North Korea, I wish people would stop thinking that.

[AK]

i.e. sanctions against Israel
I agree with you on every point but that one. How will that help Israeli workers? We know from North Korea's experience that the state will use all the funding it can get to preserve it's own existence above anything else. If economic sanctions were placed on Israel, it would divert most of it's funds to it's powerful military (seeing as it's surrounded by hostile states) and will mostly neglect it's workers. Sanctions are not the way to go.

[Admiral Swagmeister G-Funk]

I agree with you on every point but that one. How will that help Israeli workers? We know from North Korea's experience that the state will use all the funding it can get to preserve it's own existence above anything else. If economic sanctions were placed on Israel, it would divert most of it's funds to it's powerful military (seeing as it's surrounded by hostile states) and will mostly neglect it's workers. Sanctions are not the way to go.
That is true. I was merely saying that in response to the years and years of sanctions on Palestine, but I would not advocate sanctions of any kind on the workers of Israel or indeed workers anywhere. Thanks for pointing it out nonetheless, I agree 100% that sanctions aren't the way to go.

[Adi Shankara]

the best thing that could be done (not that the US would do this, but other states should, they have a moral obligation to) is to pour money into subversive elements in the North Korean state along the border between Russia and North Korea; there are still alot of Koreans who live in Siberia left over from the Korean civil war, so maybe there is a way these revolutionaries could be funded to invade North Korea from the border with Russia...and then upon victory (almost inevitable, the NK state is falling apart) they can begin a revolutionary council to divide Kim's wealth to fund state projects, and begin tribunals to charge those who have violated human rights...

this could happen...but for now, it's only fantasy.

[Subcomandante Marcos.]

My plan is to put cyanide in the hennesy at the fermenting place, then, when kim orders his weekly case, the first strike at the dynasty.....

Mwahahahaha
Mwahahahahahaha

Mwahahahahahahahahahaha

[GreenCommunism]

the best thing that could be done (not that the US would do this, but other states should, they have a moral obligation to) is to pour money into subversive elements in the North Korean state along the border between Russia and North Korea; there are still alot of Koreans who live in Siberia left over from the Korean civil war, so maybe there is a way these revolutionaries could be funded to invade North Korea from the border with Russia...and then upon victory (almost inevitable, the NK state is falling apart) they can begin a revolutionary council to divide Kim's wealth to fund state projects, and begin tribunals to charge those who have violated human rights...
i think you should spend more time thinking about how to overthrow other dictatorships. like burma, or so. and when the guy talked about how north korea is worse than burma you should look up literacy rates.

[scarletghoul]

the best thing that could be done (not that the US would do this, but other states should, they have a moral obligation to) is to pour money into subversive elements in the North Korean state
I'd be pretty surprised if they weren't already doing this, comrade.

[Sankofa]

the best thing that could be done (not that the US would do this, but other states should, they have a moral obligation to) is to pour money into subversive elements in the North Korean state along the border between Russia and North Korea; there are still alot of Koreans who live in Siberia left over from the Korean civil war, so maybe there is a way these revolutionaries could be funded to invade North Korea from the border with Russia...and then upon victory (almost inevitable, the NK state is falling apart) they can begin a revolutionary council to divide Kim's wealth to fund state projects, and begin tribunals to charge those who have violated human rights...

this could happen...but for now, it's only fantasy.

:lol::lol::laugh::laugh:
oh my fucking god!

Did you honestly just say that you want capitalist countries to stage a right-wing coup and take over North Korea?

The irony is Thomas Sankara himself was murdered in such coup! :lol::lol:

I guess being a "revolutionary" these days means become a mouth-piece for bourgeois propaganda and a cheer leader for imperialism. :rolleyes:

you're a fucking joke.

btw, I await your usual trolling and juvenile name calling! :lol:

[Adi Shankara]

I await your usual trolling and juvenile name calling! :lol:

but before that, you said:


I guess being a "revolutionary" these days means become a mouth-piece for bourgeois propaganda and a cheer leader for imperialism. :rolleyes:

you're a fucking joke.

and who's the hypocrite? go back to 4chan, that seems to be the only forum you can debate on. maybe someone there will believe your "anti-imperialist this", "anti-imperialist that" bullshit rhetoric. it's getting rather annoying, because I now realize you have no clue as to what you're talking about. show me where I said I want a right-wing capitalist coup?

you're the only one supporting a capitalist here (Kim Jong Il). You should quit denying it, because it's obvious the North Korean propaganda machine sucked you in with the "cool revolutionary music" and you only support North Korea because it makes you look all badass and rebellious and iconoclast, lol

[Sankofa]

show me where I said I want a right-wing capitalist coup?




the best thing that could be done (not that the US would do this, but other states should, they have a moral obligation to) is to pour money into subversive elements in the North Korean state along the border between Russia and North Korea; there are still alot of Koreans who live in Siberia left over from the Korean civil war, so maybe there is a way these revolutionaries could be funded to invade North Korea from the border with Russia...and then upon victory (almost inevitable, the NK state is falling apart) they can begin a revolutionary council to divide Kim's wealth to fund state projects, and begin tribunals to charge those who have violated human rights...

this could happen...but for now, it's only fantasy.

your strawmen can't save you, and I'm glad you view anti-imperialism as "bullshit rhetoric". Have you actually even read any Thomas Sankara? Anti-imperialism was a huge part of his political line.

Anyway, you're a idiotic troll who supports capitalist coups against oppressed nations.

[Sankofa]

maybe someone there will believe your "anti-imperialist this", "anti-imperialist that" bullshit rhetoric. it's getting rather annoying, because I now realize you have no clue as to what you're talking about


:lol::lol:


The imperialist system, which is worldwide and not located simply in this or that country, must be fought with an entire system that we will fashion together. Consequently, we must get to know each other, to understand each other, to establish a platform, an area of understanding between us so as to be able to combat imperialism seriously and with a good change of success

Thomas Sankara Speaks! Fight Imperialism Together, March 17, 1985 pg. 108-109


All the delegations here measure the strength of the struggle of the Nicaraguan people. We from around the world join your struggle. Throughout the entire world, we admire your struggle. Your struggle is just. It is just because it is anti-imperialist . It is just because it is against the oppressors and the assassins of the people. Your struggle is just, because it is against colonialism. And your struggle is just because it is the struggle of all the peoples of the world.

emphasis mine. :lol:

Thomas Sankara Speaks!

Nicaragua Must Be Supported by All of Us November 8, 1986

pg. 198

You were saying something about being a hypocrite? :laugh:

[AK]

The biggest problem with your proposal, Sankara, was that you said that a foreign state should support dissident groups within the DPRK. This wouldn't have been so bad if it wasn't for the fact that:


I can't think of any states - let alone a remotely "socialist" one - that would train, arm and financially support a working class communist revolution in the DPRK.
This is exactly the same imperialist tactic that the US did with right-wing rebel groups all across the world during the Cold War.
If this (hopefully) left-wing invasion/revolution were to actually succeed, it would quickly be subverted by the ensuing imperialist invasion by the capitalist states who were - for some reason (now that the country would have been invaded by imperialist interests, we know their hidden agenda) - supporting it.

The idea is - and always will be - fantasy.


The emancipation of the working class must be the act of the working class itself.

[Adi Shankara]

your strawmen can't save you, and I'm glad you view anti-imperialism as "bullshit rhetoric". Have you actually even read any Thomas Sankara? Anti-imperialism was a huge part of his political line.

Anyway, you're a idiotic troll who supports capitalist coups against oppressed nations.

What makes Thomas Sankara a legitimate opponent of colonialism was he led An Actual revolution, actually improved living conditions in Upper Volta, and he wasn't a Stalinist dictator with an ego problem living in the lap of luxury.

being anti-Kim isn't being pro-imperialist. and that's where you start pulling strawmen out of your own ass.

when you talk about anti-imperialism, it's bullshit because you think that you're so rebellious and cool defending a state the rest of the world (including most communists) dislike. when you throw around the word "imperialist" more than a conservative throws around the word "communist". Being anti-Kim is being anti-imperialist.Being pro-Kim is being pro-capitalist, and pro-monarchy.

Its like you read "Little Red book", picked up a vocabulary, and didn't
actually see what any of these terms mean.

Also: I see no reference to a right wing coup or me being against anti-Imperialism once again. I said your (as in coming from you) anti-imperialist rhetoric is bullshit, because you don't know the first thing you're talking about. Look at my quote again: I said "You have no clue what you're talking about", and that's what I meant. you trying to twist my words in order to divert attention from the fact you defend a capitalist monarchy is easily recognized.

I request you stop trying to start a flamewar. I'm just going to ignore you further from here.

[Adi Shankara]

The biggest problem with your proposal, Sankara, was that you said that a foreign state should support dissident groups within the DPRK. This wouldn't have been so bad if it wasn't for the fact that:


I can't think of any states - let alone a remotely "socialist" one - that would train, arm and financially support a working class communist revolution in the DPRK.
This is exactly the same imperialist tactic that the US did with right-wing rebel groups all across the world during the Cold War.
If this (hopefully) left-wing invasion/revolution were to actually succeed, it would quickly be subverted by the ensuing imperialist invasion by the capitalist states who were - for some reason (now that the country would have been invaded by imperialist interests, we know their hidden agenda) - supporting it.

The idea is - and always will be - fantasy.

Exactly, and that's the depressing part--I suppose we'll just have to wait until Kim Jong Il dies, so there will be a war, and then that war will have some subversives in North Korea rise out of the ashes, and then from there a legitimate socialist state can be created. Rumor has it that Kim Jong Un isn't well respected in North Korea, and that his half-brother wants to take over--so basically, it'll end up like Henry VI, only Korean style.

[Sankofa]

What makes Thomas Sankara a legitimate opponent of colonialism was...hrm...lets see...oh yes, he led [B]An Actual revolution, actually improved living conditions in Upper Volta, and he wasn't a Stalinist dictator with an ego problem living in the lap of luxury.

This might be news to you, but there was an actual revolution in North Korea that defeated the imperialists and did improve the lives of Korean people.

In fact, North Korea's economy was only a step behind Japan's in Asia until the early 90s when outside sources caused the Arduous March to occur.

Surely you're not implying that Korea was better under the Japanese or the repressive rule of Syngman Rhee?

I mean, it's not like you would support imper...

oh wait :lol:


being anti-Kim isn't being pro-imperialist. and that's where you start pulling strawmen out of your own ass.

when you talk about anti-imperialism, it's bullshit because you think that you're so rebellious and cool defending a state the rest of the world (including most communists) dislike. when you throw around the word "imperialist" more than a conservative throws around the word "communist". Being anti-Kim is being anti-imperialist.Being pro-Kim is being pro-capitalist, and pro-monarchy.

It's actually you who has a strawman argument, not me.

You said that foreign countries should fund counterrevolutionary forces to invade North Korea from Russia. Ergo: you're pro-imperialist.

I never said a thing about Kim Jung Il until you dragged him into the conversation. Explain to me again how I'm a royalist?

Why should I care about what "most" communists believe? Most so-called communists in the United States and Europe are reformists who are mouth pieces for state power (CPUSA, etc.) my political views won't change because a "majority" disagrees.

By your own logic, everyone on this site should be capitalist because "most" people in the world are anti-communist. :rolleyes:

Also, you have also failed to prove any of the sensationalisms you regurgitate about Kim Jong Il to be true.

Unless articles written by the Washington Post and globalsecurity.org now count as acceptable sources...?

I may not particularly like Kim Jong Il, but I'm not going to swallow ruling class propaganda about him, no more than I would about Castro, Marx, Lenin, etc.


Its like you read "Little Red book", picked up a vocabulary, and didn't
actually see what any of these terms mean.

That's ironic, because that's exactly what it seems you did. You have a paper thin understanding of Sankara because his very words are in contrast to your own.

You're barely a Marxist, which is evident by your overt liberalisms you display post after post.

ex: we shouldn't support oppressed states because it makes us look bad to the ruling class guys! hurr durr


Also: I see no reference to a right wing coup or me being against anti-Imperialism once again. I said your (as in coming from you) anti-imperialist rhetoric is bullshit, because you don't know the first thing you're talking about. Look at my quote again: I said "You have no clue what you're talking about", and that's what I meant. you trying to twist my words in order to divert attention from the fact you defend a capitalist monarchy is easily recognized.

Serious question: how old are you? like, are you a freshman, sophomore, etc.

So quoting you verbatim counts as "twisting" your words? :lol:

You don't have an argument, just baseless accusations and unfunny trollish quips like asking me how old I am. :rolleyes:

[Adi Shankara]

I'll answer it this one last time politely, and then I'd like to quit the arguing because I'd rather not start a flame war.


This might be news to you, but there was an actual revolution in North Korea that defeated the imperialists and did improve the lives of Korea people.

Yes, there was; and then in 1956, Kim Il Sung began Stalinist purges to remove people who were legitimately criticizing the North Korean state, and thus begun the monarchy.


In fact, North Korea's economy was only a step behind Japan's in Asia until the early 90s when outside sources caused the Arduous March to occur.

I'd like to see a source on this.
also, keep in mind the USSR funded the North Korean government for almost it's entire existence; It's no coincidence the Arduous March began right when the USSR collapsed.


Surely you're not implying that Korea was better under the Japanese or the repressive rule of Syngman Rhee?

No. I'm saying that the Northern region of Korea has never (I repeat: Never) had good leadership; the Japanese turned Korea into a slave state; Kim Il Sung and his ilk have done the exact same thing, Thus why I'm vehemently opposed to both. there is a middle ground, you know.


I mean, it's not like you would support imper...

oh wait :lol:

I don't even get what this is supposed to mean, but okay.




It's actually you who has a strawman argument, not me.

Lets just agree to disagree; I think you had a strawman argument, you think vice versa--let's just leave it at that.


You said that foreign countries should fund counterrevolutionary forces to invade North Korea from Russia. Ergo: you're pro-imperialist.

Now hold on just a minute: where did I say I wanted Russia to invade North Korea? :confused: I said socialist states should fund Revolutionary (not counterrevolutionary forces, because North Korea is a reactionary state) forces to further the aims of socialism, and to leave it up to the Korean exiles in Siberia (many of whom are still ardent communists) to overthrow the monarchy, not the Russians themselves. Koreans invading Korea to create a worker state is hardly imperialist.


I never said a thing about Kim Jung Il until you dragged him into the conversation. Explain to me again how I'm a royalist?

You're a royalist because you defend as legitimate a state founded as a communist republic, which quickly became a monarchy. you have shown an obvious partisanship to the Kim dynasty, and while not directly stated, it's greatly implied you support the North Korean king.


Why should I care about what "most" communists believe? Most so-called communists in the United States and Europe are reformists who are mouth pieces for state power (CPUSA, etc.) my political views won't change because a "majority" disagrees.

neither will the majority of communists have their beliefs change because you make baseless accusations of them all of being state reformists.


By your own logic, everyone on this site should be capitalist because "most" people in the world are anti-communist. :rolleyes:

just calling a spade a spade. if it quacks like a duck...it's a duck. and so far, you have defended an illegitimate state, which Is not founded in the best interest of the Korean people.


Also, you have also failed to prove any of the sensationalist you regurgitate about Kim Jong Il to be true.

I don't really know what you're talking about, but okay.


Unless articles written by the Washington Post and globalsecurity.org now count as acceptable sources...?

Then if Hennessy itself or a contractor that relies on accurate intelligence for it's business isn't legitimate, then pray tell what is? Songunblog? youtube? North Korean state news?


I may not particularly like Kim Jong Il, but I'm not going to swallow ruling class propaganda about him, no more than I would about Castro, Marx, Lenin, etc.

Castro is a hero with a proven track record; even the UN recognizes his achievements: http://pd.cpim.org/2010/0117_pd/01172010_18.html

Kim Jong Il has zero achievements under his belt, aside from being the fastest sperm.



That's ironic, because that's exactly what it seems you did. You have a paper thin understanding of Sankara because his very words are in contrast to your own.

I'm quite positive I know very much about Thomas Sankara. I imagine you barely even know who he is, which is why you had to rush to wikiquote to find something you can paste on here in a poor attempt to mock me.


You're barely a Marxist, which is evident by your overt liberalisms you display post after post.

And you're barely a marxist, which is evident by your pro-authoritarian stances and support for illegitimate monarchical states.


ex: we shouldn't support oppressed states because it makes us look bad to the ruling class guys! hurr durr

I can say the same about you and your support for NK, in deference to the capitalists. if you think they notice you thumbing at them--they don't. I am opposed to North Korea strictly based on a morality problem, not because I am trying to appease any "ruling classes"; if that were so, I would be against the Sandanistas, Cuba, and Vietnam as well.




So quoting you verbatim notes counts as "twisting" your words? :lol:

no, but twisting my words does.


You don't have an argument, just baseless accusations and unfunny quips like asking me how old I am. :rolleyes:

I apologize; that was inappropriate, and unnecessary. Judging on age is wrong, and I regret that.

[mikelepore]

Maybe some of you saw the videos of ABC reporter Lisa Ling's trip to North Korea where she interviewed people in their homes. This was about two or three years ago. The people were terrified. They had several pictures of the president on every wall of every home, to avoid being accused of disloyalty for not having enough pictures of him on one of the walls. When she asked one man which of his pictures of the president was his favorite, he said "all of them are my favorite", to avoid being accused of disloyalty for liking one of the pictures better than another. I felt so sad about the condition of the people.

[Adi Shankara]

Maybe some of you saw the videos of ABC reporter Lisa Ling's trip to North Korea where she interviewed people in their homes. This was about two or three years ago. The people were terrified. They had several pictures of the president on every wall of every home, to avoid being accused of disloyalty for not having enough pictures of him on one of the walls. When she asked one man which of his pictures of the president was his favorite, he said "all of them are my favorite", to avoid being accused of disloyalty for liking one of the pictures better than another. I felt so sad about the condition of the people.

But see, that supposedly doesn't happen, because North Korea is a legitimate worker's state where no man is more equal than any other :rolleyes:

[Sankofa]

Yes, there was; and then in 1956, Kim Il Sung began Stalinist purges to remove people who were legitimately criticizing the North Korean state, and thus begun the monarchy.

There is no evidence to prove that Kim Il Sung "purged" citizens that legitimately criticized the government.

In fact, Kim Il Sung spoke out against bureaucracy and party cadres who didn't hold themselves accountable to the criticism of the masses.


How can such revolutionary work be compatible with bureaucracy an anti-popular method of rule which goes against the masses and is divorced from them, defending the interests of the handful that make up the ruling classes? Revolutionary work is for the people and bureaucracy is against the people. Why, then, do some of our Party workers continue to commit bureaucratic errors? It is because they still do not know that the basis of our Party's policies is to fight for the interests of the revolutionary masses.


Some people, taking advantage of their positions, suppress others' criticism and prevent them from speaking out against the errors found in their own writings, works or activities. Such an action does the most serious harm to our nation's advance.

Selected Works of Kim Il Sung Vol. I, On Eliminating Bureaucracy, pg. 542, pg. 546

Obviously, legitimate criticism of the state is something Kim Il Sung encouraged.

Compare that to South Korea today, where the National Security Act jails people who speak out against the government and/or U.S. occupation.

The Bodo League mass killings were covered up for years, people who tried to uncover the killings were repressed by the South Korean state.

The Kwangju Massacre in the 1980s against South Korean workers and students is another testament to the policies of the "democratic" south.


I'd like to see a source on this.
also, keep in mind the USSR funded the North Korean government for almost it's entire existence; It's no coincidence the Arduous March began right when the USSR collapsed.

Many anti-communist sources point out that North Korea's economy for many years was ahead of that of the south here being one (http://www.theodora.com/wfbcurrent/korea_north/korea_north_economy.html).

Both countries, North and South, were being understandably trumped by imperialist Japan.

Yes, the fall of the Soviet Union was a hit to North Korea's economy (as well as Cuba's so I don't see why that's a big deal)

But I would also point out the lack of arable land due chiefly to bad geography, natural disasters, and the devastation of North Korea's available agriculture and vegetation as a result of bombs dropped during the War.

Add in the economic blockades and the diversion of funds and resources to defense/military purposes and it's easy to see the conditions that shaped the North's difficulties.

I suppose South Korea would have become an "economic miracle" with out millions of dollars provided by the Marshall Plan policies?


No. I'm saying that the Northern region of Korea has never (I repeat: Never) had good leadership; the Japanese turned Korea into a slave state; Kim Il Sung and his ilk have done the exact same thing, Thus why I'm vehemently opposed to both. there is a middle ground, you know.

You've totally lost it. How was North Korea under Kim Il Sung anyway similar to Japanese occupation?

The Japanese conducted secret human experiments (Unit 731), widespread rape (comfort women), forced labor, forced sterilization/abortion, etc.

You might as well have come straight up the middle and called him a Nazi.

Are you able to debate with out empty claims such as this one?


Lets just agree to disagree; I think you had a strawman argument, you think vice versa--let's just leave it at that.

I am not going to "agree to disagree", that's a a cop out.

You stated that I was supporting Kim Jong Il by simply saying North Korea should have our support against imperialism.

When I challenged you to quote me even saying his name, you declined in twice in two different threads--this is a strawman.


Now hold on just a minute: where did I say I wanted Russia to invade North Korea? :confused: I said socialist states should fund Revolutionary (not counterrevolutionary forces, because North Korea is a reactionary state) forces to further the aims of socialism, and to leave it up to the Korean exiles in Siberia (many of whom are still ardent communists) to overthrow the monarchy, not the Russians themselves. Koreans invading Korea to create a worker state is hardly imperialist.

Again:


the best thing that could be done (not that the US would do this, but other states should, they have a moral obligation to) is to pour money into subversive elements in the North Korean state along the border between Russia and North Korea; there are still alot of Koreans who live in Siberia left over from the Korean civil war, so maybe there is a way these revolutionaries could be funded to invade North Korea from the border with Russia...and then upon victory (almost inevitable, the NK state is falling apart) they can begin a revolutionary council to divide Kim's wealth to fund state projects, and begin tribunals to charge those who have violated human rights...

this could happen...but for now, it's only fantasy.

:rolleyes: My bad, you meant an invasion from the border between Russia between North Korea...that's so much better!

Pray-tell, what "socialist" states exist with the ability to fund this "revolution" by "revolutionaries" in Siberia?

This quote, by you, is proof alone you advocate imperialism. There is nothing to "agree to disagree" about. You posted it, don't get mad at me for calling you out..."comrade".


You're a royalist because you defend as legitimate a state founded as a communist republic, which quickly became a monarchy. you have shown an obvious partisanship to the Kim dynasty, and while not directly stated, it's greatly implied you support the North Korean king.

You can say I'm a royalist until you're blue in the face. Fact is, until you prove it, it's just another one of your stupid accusations.


neither will the majority of communists have their beliefs change because you make baseless accusations of them all of being state reformists.

I don't expect them to change their beliefs passed on my opinions. Likewise, their or the ruling classes view of my politics doesn't phase me.


just calling a spade a spade. if it quacks like a duck...it's a duck. and so far, you have defended an illegitimate state, which Is not founded in the best interest of the Korean people.

:lol:

How is North Korea an "illegitimate" state? Does a foreign government and army maintain military posts in Pyongyang and else where in the country?

Israel is an illegitimate country, Apartheid South Africa was an illegitimate country, the United States, Canada, Austrailia, etc. can be called illegitimate countries, but not North Korea.


Then if Hennessy itself or a contractor that relies on accurate intelligence for it's business isn't legitimate, then pray tell what is? Songunblog? youtube? North Korean state news?

Castro is a hero with a proven track record; even the UN recognizes his achievements: http://pd.cpim.org/2010/0117_pd/01172010_18.html

Kim Jong Il has zero achievements under his belt, aside from being the fastest sperm.

The article you posted in the previous thread (as well as this similar (http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/01/08/wbr.kim.jong.il/) article by CNN doesn't cite anything, it simply makes the claim with zero evidence to support it.

Despite the UN "recognizing" Cuba achievements, it still faces propaganda and oppression from the U.S.

Reputable sources aren't parrots of the U.S. state, like the WP and globalsecurity.



I'm quite positive I know very much about Thomas Sankara. I imagine you barely even know who he is, which is why you had to rush to wikiquote to find something you can paste on here in a poor attempt to mock me.

Thomas Sankara's wikiquote article is here (http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Thomas_Sankara) can you find the quotations I used? Maybe that's because they didn't come from the internet, but from my own personal copy of Thomas Sankara Speaks which I thought would be obvious since I cited chapters and page numbers. :lol:

I'm quite positive that you know nothing about Thomas Sankara because you would've known those quotes came from his works and not from wikiquote.

Oh, and it wasn't a "poor" attempt by the way. Anti-imperialism is certainly not bullshit rhetoric to Sankara. Amazing you would make that claim and name yourself after him.


And you're barely a marxist, which is evident by your pro-authoritarian stances and support for illegitimate monarchical states.

yawn.

Revolutions, by definition, are authoritarian; another empty claim.

North Korea is not an illegitimate state, regardless of any criticism you can make.


I can say the same about you and your support for NK, in deference to the capitalists. if you think they notice you thumbing at them--they don't. I am opposed to North Korea strictly based on a morality problem, not because I am trying to appease any "ruling classes"; if that were so, I would be against the Sandanistas, Cuba, and Vietnam as well.

I don't support North Korea out of "spite" to capitalists, but for the reasons I've outlined previously.

Whose line on North Korea directly supports that of the bourgeois class and their imperialists interests?

You and your fantasies about coups and taking over the country.


no, but twisting my words does.



Quoting is not twisting anything. You have failed to prove I'm a royalist, and you have failed to prove why supporting the overthrow of oppressed states is revolutionary.

[Fietsketting]

There is no evidence to prove that Kim Il Sung "purged" citizens that legitimately criticized the government.

In fact, Kim Il Sung spoke out against bureaucracy and party cadres who didn't hold themselves accountable to the criticism of the masses.

Saying one thing and doing the other is a fine socialist tradition indeed. :blushing:

[Dimentio]

.......

What you say has nothing to do with what you do.

Hugo Chàvez was elected on a stereotypical centrist anti-corruption platform originally.

I prefer a leader who is saying he's right-wing and doing left-wing stuff before a leader claiming to be left-wing but doing right-wing stuff.

[GreenCommunism]

Kim Jong Il has zero achievements under his belt, aside from being the fastest sperm.

this is a quote from another soviet board about the sucession

I don't believe that Kim Jong-un will succeed his father. Kim Jong-il was a high official in the Korea Worker's Party before he assumed power, Kim Jong-un seems to live in exile, away from contact with North Korea. He does not have the experience Kim Jong-il had.

kim Jong-il doesn't sound like a total stranger to politics like some say he is. i don't know what would be his accomplishment, but he has experience in the domain and he doesn't sound like a complete failure working in it.

also thomas sankara is reported to have had a more authoritarian government by the end of his rule due to fear of losing power.


Revolutions, by definition, are authoritarian; another empty claim.
i never quite understood that one, do you mean armed revolutions? revolution can happen with representative democracy, it's just close to impossible that they will happen. you need to large change within society that's the definition of a revolution, what is authoritarian about it? you mean that it will be strongly guided under the hand of a party or a leader?

[Adi Shankara]

There is no evidence to prove that Kim Il Sung "purged" citizens that legitimately criticized the government.

In fact, Kim Il Sung spoke out against bureaucracy and party cadres who didn't hold themselves accountable to the criticism of the masses.





Selected Works of Kim Il Sung Vol. I, On Eliminating Bureaucracy, pg. 542, pg. 546

Obviously, legitimate criticism of the state is something Kim Il Sung encouraged.

Compare that to South Korea today, where the National Security Act jails people who speak out against the government and/or U.S. occupation.

The Bodo League mass killings were covered up for years, people who tried to uncover the killings were repressed by the South Korean state.

The Kwangju Massacre in the 1980s against South Korean workers and students is another testament to the policies of the "democratic" south.



Many anti-communist sources point out that North Korea's economy for many years was ahead of that of the south here being one (http://www.theodora.com/wfbcurrent/korea_north/korea_north_economy.html).

Both countries, North and South, were being understandably trumped by imperialist Japan.

Yes, the fall of the Soviet Union was a hit to North Korea's economy (as well as Cuba's so I don't see why that's a big deal)

But I would also point out the lack of arable land due chiefly to bad geography, natural disasters, and the devastation of North Korea's available agriculture and vegetation as a result of bombs dropped during the War.

Add in the economic blockades and the diversion of funds and resources to defense/military purposes and it's easy to see the conditions that shaped the North's difficulties.

I suppose South Korea would have become an "economic miracle" with out millions of dollars provided by the Marshall Plan policies?



You've totally lost it. How was North Korea under Kim Il Sung anyway similar to Japanese occupation?

The Japanese conducted secret human experiments (Unit 731), widespread rape (comfort women), forced labor, forced sterilization/abortion, etc.

You might as well have come straight up the middle and called him a Nazi.

Are you able to debate with out empty claims such as this one?



I am not going to "agree to disagree", that's a a cop out.

You stated that I was supporting Kim Jong Il by simply saying North Korea should have our support against imperialism.

When I challenged you to quote me even saying his name, you declined in twice in two different threads--this is a strawman.



Again:



:rolleyes: My bad, you meant an invasion from the border between Russia between North Korea...that's so much better!

Pray-tell, what "socialist" states exist with the ability to fund this "revolution" by "revolutionaries" in Siberia?

This quote, by you, is proof alone you advocate imperialism. There is nothing to "agree to disagree" about. You posted it, don't get mad at me for calling you out..."comrade".



You can say I'm a royalist until you're blue in the face. Fact is, until you prove it, it's just another one of your stupid accusations.



I don't expect them to change their beliefs passed on my opinions. Likewise, their or the ruling classes view of my politics doesn't phase me.



:lol:

How is North Korea an "illegitimate" state? Does a foreign government and army maintain military posts in Pyongyang and else where in the country?

Israel is an illegitimate country, Apartheid South Africa was an illegitimate country, the United States, Canada, Austrailia, etc. can be called illegitimate countries, but not North Korea.



The article you posted in the previous thread (as well as this similar (http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/01/08/wbr.kim.jong.il/) article by CNN doesn't cite anything, it simply makes the claim with zero evidence to support it.

Despite the UN "recognizing" Cuba achievements, it still faces propaganda and oppression from the U.S.

Reputable sources aren't parrots of the U.S. state, like the WP and globalsecurity.




Thomas Sankara's wikiquote article is here (http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Thomas_Sankara) can you find the quotations I used? Maybe that's because they didn't come from the internet, but from my own personal copy of Thomas Sankara Speaks which I thought would be obvious since I cited chapters and page numbers. :lol:

I'm quite positive that you know nothing about Thomas Sankara because you would've known those quotes came from his works and not from wikiquote.

Oh, and it wasn't a "poor" attempt by the way. Anti-imperialism is certainly not bullshit rhetoric to Sankara. Amazing you would make that claim and name yourself after him.



yawn.

Revolutions, by definition, are authoritarian; another empty claim.

North Korea is not an illegitimate state, regardless of any criticism you can make.



I don't support North Korea out of "spite" to capitalists, but for the reasons I've outlined previously.

Whose line on North Korea directly supports that of the bourgeois class and their imperialists interests?

You and your fantasies about coups and taking over the country.



Quoting is not twisting anything. You have failed to prove I'm a royalist, and you have failed to prove why supporting the overthrow of oppressed states is revolutionary.

I'll answer all these posts tomorrow, but for now, all I'll say is you have made non-stop accusations of my character and of who and how I am. frankly, it's getting a bit annoying. and in regards to Thomas Sankara and not recognizing certain passages--forbid me if we may not have the same book, or I don't know the exact page numbers by heart. it's a rather simple human error, when you think about it, not knowing page numbers :rolleyes:

You can quote farm all you want, but I don't know how I do not understand Thomas Sankara. you have yet to point this out at all, except for repeating that I'm imperialist for some reason, which sounds like a play straight from the pages of Mao, in an attempt to create an intellectual shortcut where there is no real argument to be had.

with that said, it's getting late; I'm going to bed.

[Demogorgon]

There are some pretty ridiculous claims here. First of all, to begin-as is always helpful-with economics-it is ridiculous to claim that North Korea was "only a step behind Japan". It wasn't in the state it is now, but to claim it was anything like at Japanese levels is absurd. It wasn't even at Chinese levels really.

Anyone with half a grasp of Marxism could tell you why. While I am reluctant to call it a feudal state, I have acknowledged it has feudal elements and as a result has not even achieved capitalist development let alone socialism. Do we have to defend a regime that holds its people back that much? What else needs defended? The Bourbon Monarchy? There are certainly parallels.

Indeed at this stage simply achieving capitalism and South Korean Government (as exists now) would be a major improvement. Polyarchy is preferable to totalitarianism. To those who would come out with the usual rant about such Governments, yes we do oppose them, but is anyone stupid enough to claim that Adenauer wasn't an improvement on Hitler? The same principal applies here.

Now naturally I oppose any kind of Western attempt to impose a new form of Government, not least because we know that is invariably a disaster, but let's not play up that specter too much, America, Britain and so on operate on the basis of cynical realpolitik, they aren't going to topple the North unless it is firmly in their economic interests. Which it isn't. Nor are they going to bankrupt a friendly country like South Korea which is exactly what would happen if reunification was put on table. Not to mention Japan isn't going to want a nearby war on that scale and China wouldn't be too happy either. So stop pretending North Korea is a brave defender against materialism. It is the way it is because it chose isolation as a means to oppress its own people.

[Adi Shankara]

It is the way it is because it chose isolation as a means to oppress its own people.

Could not have said it better myself.

[Dimentio]

There are some pretty ridiculous claims here. First of all, to begin-as is always helpful-with economics-it is ridiculous to claim that North Korea was "only a step behind Japan". It wasn't in the state it is now, but to claim it was anything like at Japanese levels is absurd. It wasn't even at Chinese levels really.

Anyone with half a grasp of Marxism could tell you why. While I am reluctant to call it a feudal state, I have acknowledged it has feudal elements and as a result has not even achieved capitalist development let alone socialism. Do we have to defend a regime that holds its people back that much? What else needs defended? The Bourbon Monarchy? There are certainly parallels.

Indeed at this stage simply achieving capitalism and South Korean Government (as exists now) would be a major improvement. Polyarchy is preferable to totalitarianism. To those who would come out with the usual rant about such Governments, yes we do oppose them, but is anyone stupid enough to claim that Adenauer wasn't an improvement on Hitler? The same principal applies here.

Now naturally I oppose any kind of Western attempt to impose a new form of Government, not least because we know that is invariably a disaster, but let's not play up that specter too much, America, Britain and so on operate on the basis of cynical realpolitik, they aren't going to topple the North unless it is firmly in their economic interests. Which it isn't. Nor are they going to bankrupt a friendly country like South Korea which is exactly what would happen if reunification was put on table. Not to mention Japan isn't going to want a nearby war on that scale and China wouldn't be too happy either. So stop pretending North Korea is a brave defender against materialism. It is the way it is because it chose isolation as a means to oppress its own people.

Korea was as a whole pretty industrialised in 1945 (at least compared with China), as the Japanese had put up a lot of their industrial base there. While Japanese rule certainly was cruel, they also built up an infrastructure for Korea, albeit through mostly Japanese engineers and team leaders and with military production in mind.

If Kim Il-Sung hadn't tried to conquer all of Korea, it is possible that North Korea would have been somewhat better off today, given that only three houses stood standing in Pyongyang after the Korean War.

[Demogorgon]

Korea was as a whole pretty industrialised in 1945 (at least compared with China), as the Japanese had put up a lot of their industrial base there. While Japanese rule certainly was cruel, they also built up an infrastructure for Korea, albeit through mostly Japanese engineers and team leaders and with military production in mind.

If Kim Il-Sung hadn't tried to conquer all of Korea, it is possible that North Korea would have been somewhat better off today, given that only three houses stood standing in Pyongyang after the Korean War.
Yeah, that's true. Also the North was the more industrialised part of the peninsula, though it has to be said the industry wasn't exactly geared towards producing civilian goods.

Even given that though, it makes the extent to which the North fell behind all the more shameful.