The Vegan Marxist
14th November 2010, 07:57
“In order to build the new world aspired to by mankind, it is necessary to abolish the unequal old international order in all fields of politics, the economy and culture and establish an equitable new international order. There are large and small countries in the world, but there cannot be major and minor countries; there are developed nations and less developed nations, but there cannot be nations destined to dominate other nations or those destined to be dominated. All countries and nations are equal members of the international community and as such have the right to independence and equality. No privilege and no arbitrariness should be tolerated in international relations; friendship and cooperation among countries must be fully developed on the principles of mutual resect, non-interference in the affairs of other countries, equality and mutual benefit.” ~Kim Il-Sung
Over this past year, let alone since the emergence of Korean independence from Western imperialism in 1948, a series of psychological warfare tactics have been launched against the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK). Although independent from Western imperialism, the US have tirelessly struggled to not only disarm the DPRK of their only effective defensive measure against said Western imperialism, their nuclear arsenals, but have also gone against the wishes of the DPRK by setting military drills with the armed forces of South Korea, leaving only speculation and curiosity over what these new military drills are leading towards.
Although free from Western holdings, we can clearly point out that imperialism is still very much a threat against the DPRK and those who reside in it. After months of both South Korea and the United States trying to pin blame to the DPRK over the sinking of a South Korean vessel, known as the Cheonan, the DPRK and those who continue to support both their innocence and independence have remained firm in resilience against whatever accusation and propaganda is thrown at them.1
In what many of the revolutionary left would think is at a crucial time period of showing support and solidarity to our comrades of the DPRK against Western imperialism, there are those of the “revolutionary” left that tend to think otherwise. I am, of course, talking about the likes of those such as Mike Ely. A “pro-communist” activist since the ’60s who has shown an odd, but not surprising discomfort towards the DPRK.
On the ever-so-famous Facebook, a post was made by Mike Ely, stating “Jed says: A Maoist in Nepal, who moonlighted as a Buddhist philosopher, visited the DPRK (North Korea) on a cultural mission. Cringing, then laughing, he said, “We are trying to overthrow a monarchy and they’ve gone and turned socialism into a the same thing!”.”
Whether or not this trip by a Nepalese Maoist to the DPRK ever took place is debatable in itself, and really has no relevance to hold for the time being. Fact of the matter is that, because of this post, it inevitably turned into a “debate” – if one could ever call what was held a debate at all – between those who support the DPRK as both an ally towards anti-imperialism and an ally towards Socialism, and those who would seem to label themselves as dedicated Maoists.
My initial first response was to point out that, despite what this one Maoist in Nepal claims of the DPRK, in a newspaper of the Communist Party of Nepal, the Red Star, there was an article where a Maoist comrade, Krishna Bahadur Mahara, explained in great detail on all that he had witnessed during his 5 day visit to the DPRK.2 Before I start getting into what all Comrade Mahara said of the DPRK, I’d like to point out what Mike Ely then sends as his response:
“It is a dynasty. obviously. If you think it has a democratic process…. well.”
Of course, I try to first reason with him by stating that “There is a democratic process. People do vote for their leaders. There’s also a democratic process within each collective workforce.”
Sarcastically, Ely responds with what he may consider as an arguably debatable response:
“sure there is.”
Notice that Ely completely disregards the fact of me pointing out that a Maoist from the Communist Party of Nepal had written an article on the DPRK in the CPN (Maoist) newspaper, the Red Star. In my own personal opinion, it would seem that there’s a good reason for Ely completely disregarding important information. What Ely doesn’t want those reading to know is that, within this very article by the CPN (Maoist), it clearly points out the complete opposite of what Ely claims:
“While viewing the political situation of any country, we should pay attention towards the leadership and the ideology that has been developed. Kim Ill Sung has developed the Juchhe ideology as a unique contribution to the international communist movement. The political system is under the command of the Korean Labor Party. Many institutions and organizations are freely operating there. Some of the institutions and organizations have neutral ideas. The Korean Labor Party has secured its position in the power. Under the Presidium of the People’s Assembly, there is a People’s Army and people’s powers. From the point of view of multiparty competition, the political system of Korea seems a closed system; however, there is no feeling of it being a closed system as we enter into the inner part of the political system. There is a committee system from top to grass roots level; citizens have authority of fundamental rights. There is a full democratic tradition to take part in discussion and debate openly. There is a systematic process to exercise democracy and synthesize the opinions of the people. In our visit and talks, we felt that a harmonious environment has been created between the state power, party, institutions and organizations for discussion and debate. The people have accepted the political power heartily. The political power has always accepted and given priority to the sentiment of the people and their necessity.”3
This entire paragraph comes not but only 6 paragraphs from the start of the article. So it’s not like Ely could’ve missed this entire paragraph, leaving him only misinformed on the context of the article itself. No, rather we have Ely purposely disregarding the nature of what is said in this article. Only to try and help further his agenda in demonizing the DPRK.
Ely’s next response came to me as nothing less than surprising, if not also quite revealing:
“it is a sordid little police state run by a dynasty, with an unbelievably religious and dogmatic (and ultranationalist) Juche ideolgy. there is no whiff of socialism from the whole operation. It is just sad, oppressive and shakey.”
This was, of course, coming from someone who’s also labeled Socialist Cuba as being “neo-liberal” and the Soviet Union as being “social-imperialist”. So it wasn’t his lack of understanding the DPRK that came as a surprise to me. What did come off as surprising was his claims of “ultra-nationalism”. Given at the fact that he labels himself as a Maoist, meaning he upholds both the teachings of Comrade Mao Zedong and China during the Maoist-China era from 1949-1976, national pride isn’t something I would’ve thought to hear come off as a terrible thing under Ely’s way of thinking. I say this because, if we were to look over the period of independence in 1949 all the way to the Cultural Revolution from 1966-1976, one could obviously point out the almost complete resemblance of national-pride – what one could also label as “ultra-nationalism” – as that within the DPRK today as well.
In regards to Ely’s claims of the DPRK’s ideology – Juche – being “overwhelmingly religious”, I find it quite odd as to how he exactly came up with such a claim. I am curious as to whether or not he can even back up this claim, or if it was just a slide-in name he added onto the list of what he considers the DPRK to be. Fact of the matter is that the Juche ideology pertains to both the DPRK’s political and economic stance. And so, for there to be a notion of it being “overwhelmingly religious”, it mustn’t be that religious. Considering the fact that the DPRK is quite open to all religious beliefs, despite what Western media leads you to believe.4
In fact, Robert Park, a Korean-American who illegally entered the country of the DPRK in order to distribute printed materials demanding that Kim Jong Il step down from power and be put on trial for war crimes, who was subsequently captured, stated that during his visit he had learned the truth of what goes on in the DPRK, despite what he was told by Western propaganda:
“I trespassed on the border owing to a wrong understanding of the DPRK. This was caused by the West’s false propaganda.
“The West is massively feeding Children of the Secret State, Seoul Train and other documentary videos with stories about non-existent ‘human rights abuses’ and ‘mass killings’ in the DPRK, along with stories of the ‘unbearable sufferings’ of Korean christians and the like.
“This false propaganda led me, a christian, to entertain a biased view of the DPRK.”5
When it came to what he learned about religion in the DPRK, he states:
“Another shocking fact I experienced during my stay in the DPRK is that religious freedom is fully ensured in the DPRK, a reality different from what is claimed by the West.
“Being a devout christian, I thought such things as praying are unimaginable in the DPRK due to the suppression of religion.
“I gradually became aware, however, that I was wrong.
“People neither regarded praying as something unusual nor disturbed it. I was provided with conditions for praying every day as I wished.
“What astonished me more was that a bible was returned to me.
“This fact alone convinced me that religious freedom is fully ensured in the DPRK.
“I came to have stronger belief as I had an opportunity to attend the service in the Pongsu Church in Pyongyang.
“I worshipped and there, there was the preacher, there was a pastor, there was a choir, they knew the hymns, they knew the word of God. That’s why I was completely amazed. I began to weep and weep in the christian service, because I learned that there are churches and christians such as Pongsu Kyohoe (church) in different cities and regions all throughout the DPRK. They worship, pray and preach freely the word of the Bible and Christ’s word.”6
After learning all he did during his stay in the DPRK, he repented his previous actions, stating “Had I known the reality of the DPRK, what I’ve learned here, what I have been shown here, what I’ve been taught here, what I’ve been informed by all the kind people here about the DPRK, I would have never done what I did on 25 December and I repent and I’m very sorry.”
In his own words, he remembers his stay in the DPRK. He remembers the love that the people residing there shared with him, an outsider who illegally entered the country to try and subvert them against their own leader:
“Not only service personnel, but all those I met in the DPRK treated me in a kind and gentlemanly manner and protected my rights.
“People have been incredibly kind and generous here to me, very concerned for my physical health as never before in my life. I mean, my family, of course, is concerned about my physical health, but people here have been constantly concerned, and I’m very thankful for their love.”7
So for an “overwhelmingly religious” ideology, it sure shares an overwhelming amounts of love to their own people, an overwhelming care for their people’s religious beliefs, and an overwhelming understanding to those who just don’t quite understand the truth about the DPRK just yet.
Ely also makes his point of view clear when claiming that the DPRK is a “police state”. Again, it would seem almost too obvious that Ely deliberately disregarded the Red Star article:
“In our point of view, the government that is imposed on the people against the interests, ambitions and aspirations of the people is authoritarian. The government of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea is more democratic. If the political power is run following the aspirations of the people, it is not totalitarian. The political power cannot be totalitarian. The government is responsible to all the sectors of the Korean people. There is a close relationship between the government and the people. The charge of ‘totalitarian’ is the propaganda of imperialism to conceal their misdeeds in their “democratic” countries. The Korean people strongly deny these kinds of imperialist propaganda.
“I got opportunity to see some historical and cultural programs held there. We watched sports, cultural fairs and festivals. There was a huge volunteer participation of the people. We saw that the political power of Korea has not created any compulsion or obstruction against the will and aspiration of the people. They are free to think and advance ahead to develop their talent and skill. The government has given priority to their fundamental view point. The government respects and addresses public opinion and aspiration.”8
Let me point out an important section of these two paragraphs, where it states that “The charge of ‘totalitarian’ is the propaganda of imperialism”. Whereas we find Ely doing this exact thing against the DPRK. We can only find ourselves now having to point out the fact that Mike Ely is pro-imperialism. Instead of siding with the people of the DPRK, he instead sides with the lies and propaganda led to be used to try and dismantle the Democratic Republic of Korea.
Though, this also doesn’t come as a surprise to me, given his very political stance of being a Maoist. The history of Maoism also has a resemblance to that of Ely’s pro-imperialist stance, where Maoists in Afghanistan sided with the NATO imperialist forces against the Soviet Union as the Soviet’s tried protecting both Afghanistan and the Marxist government leading it against the US-backed Islamic fundamentalists, the Mujahideen:
“The CP(ML) also took a position on the Second World that the RCP was unable to accept. Like its French counterpart [the Mouvement Communiste Français (MCF) - the CP(ML) was also officially endorsed by the CPC as a fraternal party] which took its cues from the Chinese regime, the CP(ML) viewed NATO as a positive anti-Soviet force in Europe and emphasized the “objective” contradiction which exists between the Second World countries and the United States. The Second World countries in Western Europe have this dual character of being at once imperialistic themselves but threatened by the hegemonic United States. Since even that hegemonic power is less dangerous than the Soviet Union, and since the Second World countries in it have a dual character which renders them potential allies of the Third World, the CP(ML) was supportive of the existence of NATO, and adamantly against any attempt to dismantle it unilaterally.”9
Again, contradicting Ely’s claims of the DPRK being a “police state”, the Red Star article also makes it very clear about the strong and vast military presence within the DPRK:
“In course of our visit, we talked about the People’s Army. Korea calls its military strategy the “Sangun Policy”. The essence of the policy is to make the People’s Army strong for the protection of socialism. The People’s Army should always be strong for national independence and its people.
“Korea has a long history of fighting against Japanese and American imperialism. If we review this history, the policy of the security of the nation is the obligation of Korea and the Korean people. Making a strong People’s Army is a necessity for the Korean people. This is necessary due to the war imposed by imperialism because there is a long history of inhuman massacres by imperialists. More than 10 million people lost their lives in such imperialist interventions. Each Korean family is a family of martyrs. We went to the War Museum there. After the seeing the War Museum, everyone is confident that the military policy of Korea is objectively correct.”10
This, of course, only helps point out both the lack of “police state” and more clear evidence of Ely siding with imperialism. Ely’s view of a “police state” is what’s protecting the DPRK from Western imperialism in the first place. And so, for him to show opposition against such necessary actions, one can only conclude – again – that Mike Ely clearly sides with that of imperialism.
Michael Parenti, a pro-Socialist activist and historian, also points out the necessity of both the DPRK’s nuclear arsenal and vast military presence, by considering them to be more “sane” than that of the United States:
“After years of encirclement and repeated rebuffs from Washington, years of threat, isolation, and demonization, the Pyongyang leaders are convinced that the best way to resist superpower attack and domination is by developing a nuclear arsenal. It does not really sound so crazy. As already mentioned, the United States does not invade countries that are armed with long-range nuclear missiles (at least not thus far).”11
I would also like to point out where Ely calls the DPRK as being a “dynasty”. Within our debate, he also got to a point where he considered the DPRK as being a “feudo-monarchy”. Which one he agree’s with more is unknown, but I seriously doubt he really knows, himself, what the DPRK really is. Fact of the matter, just calling the DPRK a “dynasty” is a bit misleading. Yes, former leader Kim Il-Sung had chosen his successor as being his son, now-leader Kim Jong-Il. And just recently, Kim Jong-Il has also chosen a successor as well, that being of his own son, Kim Jong-Un.
The only problem with labeling the DPRK as being a dynasty, despite it’s dynasty-like process of family-only successors, is that the chosen successors come only at a time when the current leader either dies while still the leader, or cannot continue to fulfill their personal duties as leader. What comes about the leaders while they’re still alive, the process is more democratic than it is dynasty-like.
According to Deirdre Griswold, member of the Workers World Party, in an article covering the 2010 National Conference of the Worker’s Party of Korea (WPK) – the ruling worker’s party of the DPRK:
“Since 1948, the year of the founding of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, there have been only three national conferences of the Workers’ Party of Korea. These events, under the party’s charter, can take place between national party congresses in order to debate and decide the party’s direction, policy and personnel changes. …
“… The delegates elected 125 members and 105 alternates to the party’s Central Committee. That body then met and elected a Political Bureau of 17 members and 15 alternate members, as well as a Presidium of five members. This structure ensures that the experience and dedication of the entire party is reflected in the choice of leaders.
“The conference reelected Kim Jong Il as party general secretary and head of the Central Military Commission of the WPK. Kim has been in charge of the party and the nation since 1997. In that time, the DPRK has weathered many crises and military threats from the U.S. without giving in to pressure.
“It also elected Kim Jong Un to the Central Committee and made him vice-chairman of the Central Military Commission of the WPK. The commander of the Korean People’s Army had awarded him the rank of general before the conference met.”12
What we see here, clearly, is a democratic process within the WPK in order to not only elect various officials who are to hold their own personal duties in the government, but also who they believe is the most qualified in being their leader – a position that is to not only take care of their people, but also to help make sure the country is rightfully defended against the growing threat of Western imperialism.
It’s also best to point out that the WPK is not just some ruling party where there is a mere membership of a few hundred, which would put itself at a very small minority to that of the rest of those residing in the DPRK. Instead, the WPK holds a membership count in the millions. The WPK currently being the largest party in the DPRK, leading other parties such as the Chondoist Chongu Party, who hold a membership count in the thousands, and the Korean Social Democratic Party, who’s membership count is unknown at the current time.
What came next was only slightly humorous, and more so deliberately misleading:
“There is no whiff of liberation or socialism there either. And you really have to have a harsh disregard for facts and reality to miss it. Just ask the people who live there.”
The fact that Ely knows very well of me being a working class citizen in America and born in a small working class area in Virgina that Ely, himself, used to lead miner strikes often, due to the rough economic development Virgina still suffers from today, you would think that it would also be obvious for Ely to understand my complete inability of ever making my way to the DPRK, in order to actually sit down and talk with those who reside in it. Of course Ely knows this, and so he uses this inability of mine to try and create this illusion of “dominance” over knowledge of the DPRK, let alone the illusion that he knows what the people of the DPRK feel of their own government better than I do.
A comrade of Ely’s, known as Jed Brandt, decides to step into the debate by furthering more misleading propaganda against the DPRK, by stating:
“For a country like Nepal: small, isolated, poor and dominated by massive neighbors, the example of Korea isn’t something to simply “uphold” — but to avoid at all costs.”
Understand that Jed is not talking about Nepal. He’s merely comparing the DPRK to Nepal over its economic appearances. Although he is correct that the DPRK is a small country, to call the DPRK isolated is just a bit misleading. Now, if he were to state that it was only slightly-isolated, then I wouldn’t have anything against it. Because, fact of the matter, the DPRK continues to hold economic and political relations with both China and Vietnam, along with various political relations to global Communist parties and organizations worldwide, such as that of the Communist Party of Great Britain (Marxist-Leninist).
Though, I can only guess as to what Jed means by calling the DPRK “poor”. Those countries who are deemed as being “poor”, for the most part, are seen as those who are unable to keep their economy stable, and those who are unable to attend to their own people’s needs, such as that of healthcare, shelter, and food. So, in the original sense of defining countries as being “poor”, such a definition could not possibly be applied to the DPRK. Again, we find ourselves with another person – another Maoist I might add – who disregards what is said in the Red Star article:
“The most important thing is that the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea has its ultimate goal to reach to socialism. The state power has developed its economic plans and programs following the track to the socialism. The first basic thing for it is that nobody is unemployed and everybody is contributing to secure a socialist goal. The second is that the work of building infrastructure is rapidly progressing. America and Europe are now in the whirlpool of economic crisis. They attack Korea only to conceal their faults and failure. The state power has made a 4-year plan to connect its national railway links with the remote villages of the country. The government has extended its internal communication throughout the country. Publication and publicity is on a broad scale. However, in Korea, people are very hopeful about their future and the full prosperity of the nation.
“The economy of Korea is neither backward nor advanced. However, there has been a lot of economic development and it is continuously progressing. It is false that the Korean people are dying without food. The base of the economic progress is a cooperative system. These cooperatives are small, mid and large. People work in these cooperatives for their own livelihood and for contribution to the nation.”13
Just a few paragraphs above this, it also states:
“The state has provided free education and health. Everybody is employed. The government has given its priority on the fundamental rights of the people. It is fully responsible towards the people.”14
During an interview with Harpal Brar, Chairman of the Communist Party of Great Britain (Marxist-Leninist), it was stated similarly:
“Interviewer: What is your party (CPGB-ML) thinking about North Korea?
“Harpal Brar: Oh we are very supportive of North Korea. I think the North Koreans do exceptionally well. There way of doing things is not our way of doing things. But then, equally, our way of doing things is not their way of doing things. They have shown their worth by standing up to imperialism and building their country. Go to their country, it’s a clean country. Even when they have problems. In the last 10 years they’ve had a lot of problems of weather and food shortages. But they don’t let their people die. If there’s less food, then they share whatever they have.”15
During a documentary, called “Crossing the Line”, where we are given the story of James Joseph Dresnok, or better known as “Comrade Joe” – an ex-US veteran who defected from the US Army and made his way to live in the DPRK and continues to live there to this very day – he states:
“Because of the sanctions and blockades of the American government and Japanese are these thousands or I think hundreds of thousands of Korean people died from starvation … My life has never changed since I’ve been with the DPRK. The Korean people starved to death, but I got my rice rations, 800 gram a day, every day the same. When I eat my rice, I think about the people who died, who starved. But yet they fed me. People in the West. Why? Why do they let their people starve to death to feed an American? … Like I said before, the government is going to take care of me until my dying day.”16
Here, Comrade Joe talks of the starvations that did occur during the first many years of sanctions brought against the DPRK by both the US and Japanese government. Since then, they’ve learned on what was needing to be done in order to take care of their own people. Though, even during the starvations, during those rough early years of the DPRK, they continued to do the best they could to protect their people. People like Mike Ely and Jed Brandt will of course try and tell you otherwise. Just as any other pro-Western imperialist, whether they be of the mainstream media or just an everyday citizen, will try and convince you of the same.
Do I blame others for believing that people in the DPRK are starving to death and that the government is to blame? No, I don’t. How could I when you have human rights organizations such as Amnesty International who are telling them the exact same thing that pro-Western media tries telling them.17 One shouldn’t be fooled, though, of the many pro-Western lies that organizations like Amnesty International spew in order to try and demonize democratic countries like North Korea.
What came to be a surprising expose against Amnesty’s lies about the DPRK, the World Health Organization (WHO) denounced Amnesty’s report on the DPRK as being nothing but lies:
“All the facts are from people who aren’t in the country,” Garwood said. “There’s no science in the research.”18
WHO chief Margaret Chan then made her own assessment on where the DPRK stands concerning the health system:
“The health system requires further strengthening in order to sustain the government policy of universal coverage and, of course, to improve the quality of services. More investments are required to upgrade infrastructure and equipment and to ensure adequate supplies of medicines and other commodities, and to address the correct skill mix of the health workforce.”19
Despite these challenges that the DPRK has had to face, all due to the increase of sanctions being brought against them by the US, they were still able to push forward through great achievements. Even where WHO chief Margaret Chan points out herself:
No shortage of doctors and nurses;
Doesn’t suffer from a so-called brain drain of healthcare professionals;
Has a very elaborate health infrastructure and has developed a network of primary health care physicians;
Has done a good job in areas such as immunization coverage, effective implementation of maternal, newborn and child health interventions;
Provided an effective tuberculosis treatment and in successfully reducing malaria cases.20
What this tells us is that, despite the continuous attempts by the US and allies to try and make the DPRK’s economic conditions unbearable, the DPRK have pulled through under their Socialist system. They continue to take care of their people in the best of their ability, and they continue to this day in protecting the country of its entirety against Western imperialism.
Ultra-leftists, such as that of Mike Ely and all those who side with him, are not here to try and help the Proletarian movement. They are here to divide the movement, and to then scatter those of the divided towards an ideology that fit to their standards, to their way of thinking.
Ely then tries ending the debate by stating that we “shouldn’t blow our process of regroupment by seeking to romanticize the scattered and oppressive shards of the previous socialist camp.”
Although I don’t particularly agree with his claims of the DPRK being post-socialist and oppressive, I do agree with him that we shouldn’t be romanticizing other countries. We should be building forward instead of remaining fixated on the current status-quo of our, or others economic living standards. But we also shouldn’t be spewing lies against countries, against people who reside in said countries that are of the same movement of moving forward. Mike Ely does just that. Instead of embracing his own wishes of our movement moving forward, he limits only those who he feels should move forward, and then sides with imperialist propaganda to try and help demonize those he does not agree with.
Yes, we should be moving forward towards our end goal of Communism. But we should also be moving forward collectively. An intellectual that we all know once said “Workers of the World Unite!”. We should always keep that single phrase at both heart and mind, because it’ll be the only reason why we ever achieve Communism – not as a divided force, but as a collective force.
Red Love & Salutes!
1. “Mass Meeting Held to Condemn Anti-DPRK Smear Campaign”, Korean Central News Agency, May 30, 2010.
2. Mahara, Krishna B. “Jucche Ideology Leading to Socialism.” Red Star [Nepal] 2008. Print.
3. Ibid.
4. “Video: To all those who still like to claim that religious beliefs are oppressed in the DPRK”, Red Ant Liberation Army News, October 18, 2010.
5. “American trespasser interviewed in north Korea”, Proletarian Online, April 2010.
6. Ibid.
7. Ibid.
8. Red Star.
9. Fields, Belden. “Maoism in the United States.” Trotskyism and Maoism: Theory and Practice in France and the United States. Praeger, 1989. Print.
10. Red Star.
11. Michael Parenti, “North Korea: “Sanity” at the Brink”, Michael Parenti Political Archive, 2009.
12. Deirdre Griswold, “Workers’ Party of Korea elects leaders”, Workers World, Oct 14, 2010.
13. Red Star.
14. Ibid.
15. “Two short video interviews with Harpal Brar”, The Marxist-Leninist, October 22, 2009.
16. Crossing the Line. Dir. Daniel Gordon. Prod. Nicholas Bonner. BBC, 2006. 9 Dec. 2009. Web. http://marxistleninist.wordpress.com/2009/12/09/documentary-crossing-the-line/.
17. Stephen Gowans, “Amnesty International botches blame for North Korea’s crumbling healthcare”, what’s left, July 20, 2010.
18. Bradley S. Klapper, “WHO criticizes Amnesty report into NKorea health”, The Associated Press, July 16, 2010.
19. Lisa Schlein, “WHO chief notes N. Korean achievements in public health care”, Voice of America News, April 30, 2010.
20. Ibid.
Over this past year, let alone since the emergence of Korean independence from Western imperialism in 1948, a series of psychological warfare tactics have been launched against the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK). Although independent from Western imperialism, the US have tirelessly struggled to not only disarm the DPRK of their only effective defensive measure against said Western imperialism, their nuclear arsenals, but have also gone against the wishes of the DPRK by setting military drills with the armed forces of South Korea, leaving only speculation and curiosity over what these new military drills are leading towards.
Although free from Western holdings, we can clearly point out that imperialism is still very much a threat against the DPRK and those who reside in it. After months of both South Korea and the United States trying to pin blame to the DPRK over the sinking of a South Korean vessel, known as the Cheonan, the DPRK and those who continue to support both their innocence and independence have remained firm in resilience against whatever accusation and propaganda is thrown at them.1
In what many of the revolutionary left would think is at a crucial time period of showing support and solidarity to our comrades of the DPRK against Western imperialism, there are those of the “revolutionary” left that tend to think otherwise. I am, of course, talking about the likes of those such as Mike Ely. A “pro-communist” activist since the ’60s who has shown an odd, but not surprising discomfort towards the DPRK.
On the ever-so-famous Facebook, a post was made by Mike Ely, stating “Jed says: A Maoist in Nepal, who moonlighted as a Buddhist philosopher, visited the DPRK (North Korea) on a cultural mission. Cringing, then laughing, he said, “We are trying to overthrow a monarchy and they’ve gone and turned socialism into a the same thing!”.”
Whether or not this trip by a Nepalese Maoist to the DPRK ever took place is debatable in itself, and really has no relevance to hold for the time being. Fact of the matter is that, because of this post, it inevitably turned into a “debate” – if one could ever call what was held a debate at all – between those who support the DPRK as both an ally towards anti-imperialism and an ally towards Socialism, and those who would seem to label themselves as dedicated Maoists.
My initial first response was to point out that, despite what this one Maoist in Nepal claims of the DPRK, in a newspaper of the Communist Party of Nepal, the Red Star, there was an article where a Maoist comrade, Krishna Bahadur Mahara, explained in great detail on all that he had witnessed during his 5 day visit to the DPRK.2 Before I start getting into what all Comrade Mahara said of the DPRK, I’d like to point out what Mike Ely then sends as his response:
“It is a dynasty. obviously. If you think it has a democratic process…. well.”
Of course, I try to first reason with him by stating that “There is a democratic process. People do vote for their leaders. There’s also a democratic process within each collective workforce.”
Sarcastically, Ely responds with what he may consider as an arguably debatable response:
“sure there is.”
Notice that Ely completely disregards the fact of me pointing out that a Maoist from the Communist Party of Nepal had written an article on the DPRK in the CPN (Maoist) newspaper, the Red Star. In my own personal opinion, it would seem that there’s a good reason for Ely completely disregarding important information. What Ely doesn’t want those reading to know is that, within this very article by the CPN (Maoist), it clearly points out the complete opposite of what Ely claims:
“While viewing the political situation of any country, we should pay attention towards the leadership and the ideology that has been developed. Kim Ill Sung has developed the Juchhe ideology as a unique contribution to the international communist movement. The political system is under the command of the Korean Labor Party. Many institutions and organizations are freely operating there. Some of the institutions and organizations have neutral ideas. The Korean Labor Party has secured its position in the power. Under the Presidium of the People’s Assembly, there is a People’s Army and people’s powers. From the point of view of multiparty competition, the political system of Korea seems a closed system; however, there is no feeling of it being a closed system as we enter into the inner part of the political system. There is a committee system from top to grass roots level; citizens have authority of fundamental rights. There is a full democratic tradition to take part in discussion and debate openly. There is a systematic process to exercise democracy and synthesize the opinions of the people. In our visit and talks, we felt that a harmonious environment has been created between the state power, party, institutions and organizations for discussion and debate. The people have accepted the political power heartily. The political power has always accepted and given priority to the sentiment of the people and their necessity.”3
This entire paragraph comes not but only 6 paragraphs from the start of the article. So it’s not like Ely could’ve missed this entire paragraph, leaving him only misinformed on the context of the article itself. No, rather we have Ely purposely disregarding the nature of what is said in this article. Only to try and help further his agenda in demonizing the DPRK.
Ely’s next response came to me as nothing less than surprising, if not also quite revealing:
“it is a sordid little police state run by a dynasty, with an unbelievably religious and dogmatic (and ultranationalist) Juche ideolgy. there is no whiff of socialism from the whole operation. It is just sad, oppressive and shakey.”
This was, of course, coming from someone who’s also labeled Socialist Cuba as being “neo-liberal” and the Soviet Union as being “social-imperialist”. So it wasn’t his lack of understanding the DPRK that came as a surprise to me. What did come off as surprising was his claims of “ultra-nationalism”. Given at the fact that he labels himself as a Maoist, meaning he upholds both the teachings of Comrade Mao Zedong and China during the Maoist-China era from 1949-1976, national pride isn’t something I would’ve thought to hear come off as a terrible thing under Ely’s way of thinking. I say this because, if we were to look over the period of independence in 1949 all the way to the Cultural Revolution from 1966-1976, one could obviously point out the almost complete resemblance of national-pride – what one could also label as “ultra-nationalism” – as that within the DPRK today as well.
In regards to Ely’s claims of the DPRK’s ideology – Juche – being “overwhelmingly religious”, I find it quite odd as to how he exactly came up with such a claim. I am curious as to whether or not he can even back up this claim, or if it was just a slide-in name he added onto the list of what he considers the DPRK to be. Fact of the matter is that the Juche ideology pertains to both the DPRK’s political and economic stance. And so, for there to be a notion of it being “overwhelmingly religious”, it mustn’t be that religious. Considering the fact that the DPRK is quite open to all religious beliefs, despite what Western media leads you to believe.4
In fact, Robert Park, a Korean-American who illegally entered the country of the DPRK in order to distribute printed materials demanding that Kim Jong Il step down from power and be put on trial for war crimes, who was subsequently captured, stated that during his visit he had learned the truth of what goes on in the DPRK, despite what he was told by Western propaganda:
“I trespassed on the border owing to a wrong understanding of the DPRK. This was caused by the West’s false propaganda.
“The West is massively feeding Children of the Secret State, Seoul Train and other documentary videos with stories about non-existent ‘human rights abuses’ and ‘mass killings’ in the DPRK, along with stories of the ‘unbearable sufferings’ of Korean christians and the like.
“This false propaganda led me, a christian, to entertain a biased view of the DPRK.”5
When it came to what he learned about religion in the DPRK, he states:
“Another shocking fact I experienced during my stay in the DPRK is that religious freedom is fully ensured in the DPRK, a reality different from what is claimed by the West.
“Being a devout christian, I thought such things as praying are unimaginable in the DPRK due to the suppression of religion.
“I gradually became aware, however, that I was wrong.
“People neither regarded praying as something unusual nor disturbed it. I was provided with conditions for praying every day as I wished.
“What astonished me more was that a bible was returned to me.
“This fact alone convinced me that religious freedom is fully ensured in the DPRK.
“I came to have stronger belief as I had an opportunity to attend the service in the Pongsu Church in Pyongyang.
“I worshipped and there, there was the preacher, there was a pastor, there was a choir, they knew the hymns, they knew the word of God. That’s why I was completely amazed. I began to weep and weep in the christian service, because I learned that there are churches and christians such as Pongsu Kyohoe (church) in different cities and regions all throughout the DPRK. They worship, pray and preach freely the word of the Bible and Christ’s word.”6
After learning all he did during his stay in the DPRK, he repented his previous actions, stating “Had I known the reality of the DPRK, what I’ve learned here, what I have been shown here, what I’ve been taught here, what I’ve been informed by all the kind people here about the DPRK, I would have never done what I did on 25 December and I repent and I’m very sorry.”
In his own words, he remembers his stay in the DPRK. He remembers the love that the people residing there shared with him, an outsider who illegally entered the country to try and subvert them against their own leader:
“Not only service personnel, but all those I met in the DPRK treated me in a kind and gentlemanly manner and protected my rights.
“People have been incredibly kind and generous here to me, very concerned for my physical health as never before in my life. I mean, my family, of course, is concerned about my physical health, but people here have been constantly concerned, and I’m very thankful for their love.”7
So for an “overwhelmingly religious” ideology, it sure shares an overwhelming amounts of love to their own people, an overwhelming care for their people’s religious beliefs, and an overwhelming understanding to those who just don’t quite understand the truth about the DPRK just yet.
Ely also makes his point of view clear when claiming that the DPRK is a “police state”. Again, it would seem almost too obvious that Ely deliberately disregarded the Red Star article:
“In our point of view, the government that is imposed on the people against the interests, ambitions and aspirations of the people is authoritarian. The government of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea is more democratic. If the political power is run following the aspirations of the people, it is not totalitarian. The political power cannot be totalitarian. The government is responsible to all the sectors of the Korean people. There is a close relationship between the government and the people. The charge of ‘totalitarian’ is the propaganda of imperialism to conceal their misdeeds in their “democratic” countries. The Korean people strongly deny these kinds of imperialist propaganda.
“I got opportunity to see some historical and cultural programs held there. We watched sports, cultural fairs and festivals. There was a huge volunteer participation of the people. We saw that the political power of Korea has not created any compulsion or obstruction against the will and aspiration of the people. They are free to think and advance ahead to develop their talent and skill. The government has given priority to their fundamental view point. The government respects and addresses public opinion and aspiration.”8
Let me point out an important section of these two paragraphs, where it states that “The charge of ‘totalitarian’ is the propaganda of imperialism”. Whereas we find Ely doing this exact thing against the DPRK. We can only find ourselves now having to point out the fact that Mike Ely is pro-imperialism. Instead of siding with the people of the DPRK, he instead sides with the lies and propaganda led to be used to try and dismantle the Democratic Republic of Korea.
Though, this also doesn’t come as a surprise to me, given his very political stance of being a Maoist. The history of Maoism also has a resemblance to that of Ely’s pro-imperialist stance, where Maoists in Afghanistan sided with the NATO imperialist forces against the Soviet Union as the Soviet’s tried protecting both Afghanistan and the Marxist government leading it against the US-backed Islamic fundamentalists, the Mujahideen:
“The CP(ML) also took a position on the Second World that the RCP was unable to accept. Like its French counterpart [the Mouvement Communiste Français (MCF) - the CP(ML) was also officially endorsed by the CPC as a fraternal party] which took its cues from the Chinese regime, the CP(ML) viewed NATO as a positive anti-Soviet force in Europe and emphasized the “objective” contradiction which exists between the Second World countries and the United States. The Second World countries in Western Europe have this dual character of being at once imperialistic themselves but threatened by the hegemonic United States. Since even that hegemonic power is less dangerous than the Soviet Union, and since the Second World countries in it have a dual character which renders them potential allies of the Third World, the CP(ML) was supportive of the existence of NATO, and adamantly against any attempt to dismantle it unilaterally.”9
Again, contradicting Ely’s claims of the DPRK being a “police state”, the Red Star article also makes it very clear about the strong and vast military presence within the DPRK:
“In course of our visit, we talked about the People’s Army. Korea calls its military strategy the “Sangun Policy”. The essence of the policy is to make the People’s Army strong for the protection of socialism. The People’s Army should always be strong for national independence and its people.
“Korea has a long history of fighting against Japanese and American imperialism. If we review this history, the policy of the security of the nation is the obligation of Korea and the Korean people. Making a strong People’s Army is a necessity for the Korean people. This is necessary due to the war imposed by imperialism because there is a long history of inhuman massacres by imperialists. More than 10 million people lost their lives in such imperialist interventions. Each Korean family is a family of martyrs. We went to the War Museum there. After the seeing the War Museum, everyone is confident that the military policy of Korea is objectively correct.”10
This, of course, only helps point out both the lack of “police state” and more clear evidence of Ely siding with imperialism. Ely’s view of a “police state” is what’s protecting the DPRK from Western imperialism in the first place. And so, for him to show opposition against such necessary actions, one can only conclude – again – that Mike Ely clearly sides with that of imperialism.
Michael Parenti, a pro-Socialist activist and historian, also points out the necessity of both the DPRK’s nuclear arsenal and vast military presence, by considering them to be more “sane” than that of the United States:
“After years of encirclement and repeated rebuffs from Washington, years of threat, isolation, and demonization, the Pyongyang leaders are convinced that the best way to resist superpower attack and domination is by developing a nuclear arsenal. It does not really sound so crazy. As already mentioned, the United States does not invade countries that are armed with long-range nuclear missiles (at least not thus far).”11
I would also like to point out where Ely calls the DPRK as being a “dynasty”. Within our debate, he also got to a point where he considered the DPRK as being a “feudo-monarchy”. Which one he agree’s with more is unknown, but I seriously doubt he really knows, himself, what the DPRK really is. Fact of the matter, just calling the DPRK a “dynasty” is a bit misleading. Yes, former leader Kim Il-Sung had chosen his successor as being his son, now-leader Kim Jong-Il. And just recently, Kim Jong-Il has also chosen a successor as well, that being of his own son, Kim Jong-Un.
The only problem with labeling the DPRK as being a dynasty, despite it’s dynasty-like process of family-only successors, is that the chosen successors come only at a time when the current leader either dies while still the leader, or cannot continue to fulfill their personal duties as leader. What comes about the leaders while they’re still alive, the process is more democratic than it is dynasty-like.
According to Deirdre Griswold, member of the Workers World Party, in an article covering the 2010 National Conference of the Worker’s Party of Korea (WPK) – the ruling worker’s party of the DPRK:
“Since 1948, the year of the founding of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, there have been only three national conferences of the Workers’ Party of Korea. These events, under the party’s charter, can take place between national party congresses in order to debate and decide the party’s direction, policy and personnel changes. …
“… The delegates elected 125 members and 105 alternates to the party’s Central Committee. That body then met and elected a Political Bureau of 17 members and 15 alternate members, as well as a Presidium of five members. This structure ensures that the experience and dedication of the entire party is reflected in the choice of leaders.
“The conference reelected Kim Jong Il as party general secretary and head of the Central Military Commission of the WPK. Kim has been in charge of the party and the nation since 1997. In that time, the DPRK has weathered many crises and military threats from the U.S. without giving in to pressure.
“It also elected Kim Jong Un to the Central Committee and made him vice-chairman of the Central Military Commission of the WPK. The commander of the Korean People’s Army had awarded him the rank of general before the conference met.”12
What we see here, clearly, is a democratic process within the WPK in order to not only elect various officials who are to hold their own personal duties in the government, but also who they believe is the most qualified in being their leader – a position that is to not only take care of their people, but also to help make sure the country is rightfully defended against the growing threat of Western imperialism.
It’s also best to point out that the WPK is not just some ruling party where there is a mere membership of a few hundred, which would put itself at a very small minority to that of the rest of those residing in the DPRK. Instead, the WPK holds a membership count in the millions. The WPK currently being the largest party in the DPRK, leading other parties such as the Chondoist Chongu Party, who hold a membership count in the thousands, and the Korean Social Democratic Party, who’s membership count is unknown at the current time.
What came next was only slightly humorous, and more so deliberately misleading:
“There is no whiff of liberation or socialism there either. And you really have to have a harsh disregard for facts and reality to miss it. Just ask the people who live there.”
The fact that Ely knows very well of me being a working class citizen in America and born in a small working class area in Virgina that Ely, himself, used to lead miner strikes often, due to the rough economic development Virgina still suffers from today, you would think that it would also be obvious for Ely to understand my complete inability of ever making my way to the DPRK, in order to actually sit down and talk with those who reside in it. Of course Ely knows this, and so he uses this inability of mine to try and create this illusion of “dominance” over knowledge of the DPRK, let alone the illusion that he knows what the people of the DPRK feel of their own government better than I do.
A comrade of Ely’s, known as Jed Brandt, decides to step into the debate by furthering more misleading propaganda against the DPRK, by stating:
“For a country like Nepal: small, isolated, poor and dominated by massive neighbors, the example of Korea isn’t something to simply “uphold” — but to avoid at all costs.”
Understand that Jed is not talking about Nepal. He’s merely comparing the DPRK to Nepal over its economic appearances. Although he is correct that the DPRK is a small country, to call the DPRK isolated is just a bit misleading. Now, if he were to state that it was only slightly-isolated, then I wouldn’t have anything against it. Because, fact of the matter, the DPRK continues to hold economic and political relations with both China and Vietnam, along with various political relations to global Communist parties and organizations worldwide, such as that of the Communist Party of Great Britain (Marxist-Leninist).
Though, I can only guess as to what Jed means by calling the DPRK “poor”. Those countries who are deemed as being “poor”, for the most part, are seen as those who are unable to keep their economy stable, and those who are unable to attend to their own people’s needs, such as that of healthcare, shelter, and food. So, in the original sense of defining countries as being “poor”, such a definition could not possibly be applied to the DPRK. Again, we find ourselves with another person – another Maoist I might add – who disregards what is said in the Red Star article:
“The most important thing is that the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea has its ultimate goal to reach to socialism. The state power has developed its economic plans and programs following the track to the socialism. The first basic thing for it is that nobody is unemployed and everybody is contributing to secure a socialist goal. The second is that the work of building infrastructure is rapidly progressing. America and Europe are now in the whirlpool of economic crisis. They attack Korea only to conceal their faults and failure. The state power has made a 4-year plan to connect its national railway links with the remote villages of the country. The government has extended its internal communication throughout the country. Publication and publicity is on a broad scale. However, in Korea, people are very hopeful about their future and the full prosperity of the nation.
“The economy of Korea is neither backward nor advanced. However, there has been a lot of economic development and it is continuously progressing. It is false that the Korean people are dying without food. The base of the economic progress is a cooperative system. These cooperatives are small, mid and large. People work in these cooperatives for their own livelihood and for contribution to the nation.”13
Just a few paragraphs above this, it also states:
“The state has provided free education and health. Everybody is employed. The government has given its priority on the fundamental rights of the people. It is fully responsible towards the people.”14
During an interview with Harpal Brar, Chairman of the Communist Party of Great Britain (Marxist-Leninist), it was stated similarly:
“Interviewer: What is your party (CPGB-ML) thinking about North Korea?
“Harpal Brar: Oh we are very supportive of North Korea. I think the North Koreans do exceptionally well. There way of doing things is not our way of doing things. But then, equally, our way of doing things is not their way of doing things. They have shown their worth by standing up to imperialism and building their country. Go to their country, it’s a clean country. Even when they have problems. In the last 10 years they’ve had a lot of problems of weather and food shortages. But they don’t let their people die. If there’s less food, then they share whatever they have.”15
During a documentary, called “Crossing the Line”, where we are given the story of James Joseph Dresnok, or better known as “Comrade Joe” – an ex-US veteran who defected from the US Army and made his way to live in the DPRK and continues to live there to this very day – he states:
“Because of the sanctions and blockades of the American government and Japanese are these thousands or I think hundreds of thousands of Korean people died from starvation … My life has never changed since I’ve been with the DPRK. The Korean people starved to death, but I got my rice rations, 800 gram a day, every day the same. When I eat my rice, I think about the people who died, who starved. But yet they fed me. People in the West. Why? Why do they let their people starve to death to feed an American? … Like I said before, the government is going to take care of me until my dying day.”16
Here, Comrade Joe talks of the starvations that did occur during the first many years of sanctions brought against the DPRK by both the US and Japanese government. Since then, they’ve learned on what was needing to be done in order to take care of their own people. Though, even during the starvations, during those rough early years of the DPRK, they continued to do the best they could to protect their people. People like Mike Ely and Jed Brandt will of course try and tell you otherwise. Just as any other pro-Western imperialist, whether they be of the mainstream media or just an everyday citizen, will try and convince you of the same.
Do I blame others for believing that people in the DPRK are starving to death and that the government is to blame? No, I don’t. How could I when you have human rights organizations such as Amnesty International who are telling them the exact same thing that pro-Western media tries telling them.17 One shouldn’t be fooled, though, of the many pro-Western lies that organizations like Amnesty International spew in order to try and demonize democratic countries like North Korea.
What came to be a surprising expose against Amnesty’s lies about the DPRK, the World Health Organization (WHO) denounced Amnesty’s report on the DPRK as being nothing but lies:
“All the facts are from people who aren’t in the country,” Garwood said. “There’s no science in the research.”18
WHO chief Margaret Chan then made her own assessment on where the DPRK stands concerning the health system:
“The health system requires further strengthening in order to sustain the government policy of universal coverage and, of course, to improve the quality of services. More investments are required to upgrade infrastructure and equipment and to ensure adequate supplies of medicines and other commodities, and to address the correct skill mix of the health workforce.”19
Despite these challenges that the DPRK has had to face, all due to the increase of sanctions being brought against them by the US, they were still able to push forward through great achievements. Even where WHO chief Margaret Chan points out herself:
No shortage of doctors and nurses;
Doesn’t suffer from a so-called brain drain of healthcare professionals;
Has a very elaborate health infrastructure and has developed a network of primary health care physicians;
Has done a good job in areas such as immunization coverage, effective implementation of maternal, newborn and child health interventions;
Provided an effective tuberculosis treatment and in successfully reducing malaria cases.20
What this tells us is that, despite the continuous attempts by the US and allies to try and make the DPRK’s economic conditions unbearable, the DPRK have pulled through under their Socialist system. They continue to take care of their people in the best of their ability, and they continue to this day in protecting the country of its entirety against Western imperialism.
Ultra-leftists, such as that of Mike Ely and all those who side with him, are not here to try and help the Proletarian movement. They are here to divide the movement, and to then scatter those of the divided towards an ideology that fit to their standards, to their way of thinking.
Ely then tries ending the debate by stating that we “shouldn’t blow our process of regroupment by seeking to romanticize the scattered and oppressive shards of the previous socialist camp.”
Although I don’t particularly agree with his claims of the DPRK being post-socialist and oppressive, I do agree with him that we shouldn’t be romanticizing other countries. We should be building forward instead of remaining fixated on the current status-quo of our, or others economic living standards. But we also shouldn’t be spewing lies against countries, against people who reside in said countries that are of the same movement of moving forward. Mike Ely does just that. Instead of embracing his own wishes of our movement moving forward, he limits only those who he feels should move forward, and then sides with imperialist propaganda to try and help demonize those he does not agree with.
Yes, we should be moving forward towards our end goal of Communism. But we should also be moving forward collectively. An intellectual that we all know once said “Workers of the World Unite!”. We should always keep that single phrase at both heart and mind, because it’ll be the only reason why we ever achieve Communism – not as a divided force, but as a collective force.
Red Love & Salutes!
1. “Mass Meeting Held to Condemn Anti-DPRK Smear Campaign”, Korean Central News Agency, May 30, 2010.
2. Mahara, Krishna B. “Jucche Ideology Leading to Socialism.” Red Star [Nepal] 2008. Print.
3. Ibid.
4. “Video: To all those who still like to claim that religious beliefs are oppressed in the DPRK”, Red Ant Liberation Army News, October 18, 2010.
5. “American trespasser interviewed in north Korea”, Proletarian Online, April 2010.
6. Ibid.
7. Ibid.
8. Red Star.
9. Fields, Belden. “Maoism in the United States.” Trotskyism and Maoism: Theory and Practice in France and the United States. Praeger, 1989. Print.
10. Red Star.
11. Michael Parenti, “North Korea: “Sanity” at the Brink”, Michael Parenti Political Archive, 2009.
12. Deirdre Griswold, “Workers’ Party of Korea elects leaders”, Workers World, Oct 14, 2010.
13. Red Star.
14. Ibid.
15. “Two short video interviews with Harpal Brar”, The Marxist-Leninist, October 22, 2009.
16. Crossing the Line. Dir. Daniel Gordon. Prod. Nicholas Bonner. BBC, 2006. 9 Dec. 2009. Web. http://marxistleninist.wordpress.com/2009/12/09/documentary-crossing-the-line/.
17. Stephen Gowans, “Amnesty International botches blame for North Korea’s crumbling healthcare”, what’s left, July 20, 2010.
18. Bradley S. Klapper, “WHO criticizes Amnesty report into NKorea health”, The Associated Press, July 16, 2010.
19. Lisa Schlein, “WHO chief notes N. Korean achievements in public health care”, Voice of America News, April 30, 2010.
20. Ibid.