Kim Jong/Sung Il apologists...

[The American]

Are there any real apologists for the North Korean regime here? Does anyone here actually support/defend the administration in North Korea? How can you?
The terrors in North Korea aren't blown up into misinformation like the American/Western media did to Cuba, USSR, China, and South America. It's actually happening and I cannot imagine any true socialist/communist can defend the horrors like that. Kim Jong il spends extravagantly on himself and the ruling class and ignores and exploits the working class, which goes completely against the tenets of socialism.

My question is...does anyone actually support the north korean regime?

[Savage]

I've heard someone call North Korea a 'workers state', but the overwhelming response from the left is negative, as It should be. I think there's probably a fair few people who'll defend IL Sung, I don't know much at all about NK history ( particularly during the existence of the Soviet Union) but there seems to be a lot more respect for Il Sung than Jong Il, mostly because he came from the proletariat.

[Manic Impressive]

Here's a recent thread with a poll asking whether people would support DPRK in a war with the US. I can't believe it ended up exactly 50/50 so yeah I think many people on here actually do support North Korea
http://www.revleft.com/vb/would-you-support-t144624/index14.html

[Dimentio]

Here's a recent thread with a poll asking whether people would support DPRK in a war with the US. I can't believe it ended up exactly 50/50 so yeah I think many people on here actually do support North Korea
http://www.revleft.com/vb/would-you-support-t144624/index14.html

Most of them don't do.

If there was a fictional third world country which had lots of oil, and a population with a leader who is having ritual child sacrifices and convicts routinely gang-raped in public, while most women are slaves and most men are scratching their scrotums all day and throwing faeces at one another laughing hysterically, I would oppose western imperialism there still - no matter how reactionary or cruel the leadership there is.

"Humanitarian interventions" would necessarily lead to an increase of US dominance world-wide.

[scarletghoul]

I support the DPRK.

Are there any real apologists for the North Korean regime here? Does anyone here actually support/defend the administration in North Korea? How can you?
The terrors in North Korea aren't blown up into misinformation like the American/Western media did to Cuba, USSR, China, and South America. It's actually happening and I cannot imagine any true socialist/communist can defend the horrors like that. Kim Jong il spends extravagantly on himself and the ruling class and ignores and exploits the working class, which goes completely against the tenets of socialism. Wow really ?!?! If that's true its terrible; could you please give some sources and evidence ??

[PilesOfDeadNazis]

The terrors in North Korea aren't blown up into misinformation like the American/Western media did to Cuba, USSR, China, and South America. It's actually happening
Have you actually looked at any statistics or articles that aren't controlled by American right-wing media? What "terrors" are you speaking of and how did you hear of them if not through Western media?

I'm not being an ass, I promise. I'm just curious since you sound convinced that they don't make it up.

[Dimentio]

I support the DPRK.
Wow really ?!?! If that's true its terrible; could you please give some sources and evidence ??

What is so great about it?

I would rather be born in South Korea than in the North.

[Wanted Man]

Have you actually looked at any statistics or articles that aren't controlled by American right-wing media? What "terrors" are you speaking of and how did you hear of them if not through Western media?

I'm not being an ass, I promise. I'm just curious since you sound convinced that they don't make it up.

Yeah, this phenomenon is basically the strange "North Korean exception" where apparently any old rubbish is suddenly treated as the gospel truth.


What is so great about it?

I would rather be born in South Korea than in the North.

I'd rather be born on Tahiti than in Sweden, so what's your point? People think it's easy to make a direct comparison between North and South Korea because they're both called "Korea" and lie close to each other, but of course there are massive differences.

[The Vegan Marxist]

Kim Jong il spends extravagantly on himself and the ruling class and ignores and exploits the working class, which goes completely against the tenets of socialism.

Please do point out this grand evidence of yours. I'd love to have it at hand next time I go to another imperialism-apologist meeting. :thumbup1:

[The Idler]

Say hello to the CPGB-ML
(http://www.cpgb-ml.org/index.php?secName=proletarian&subName=display&art=680)

[Black Sheep]

Please do point out this grand evidence of yours. I'd love to have it at hand next time I go to another imperialism-apologist meeting. :thumbup1:

As you can see,dear op, many users like the one i'm quoting mistake the act of left-wise criticising states which call themselves communist, but in reality are undemocratic societies where spending a gazillion of dollars in huge monuments and cliche-full extravaganza parades and shows is more important than keeping a stable power & food supply..

..with the act of supporting a military invasion on these states.

So they may be NK apologists, but their apologism stems from a deep ... lack of logic, to use a kind characterisation.

In short, when fetishizing anti-imperialism, such bullshit occurs.

[The Vegan Marxist]

As you can see,dear op, many users like the one i'm quoting mistake the act of left-wise criticising states which call themselves communist, but in reality are undemocratic societies where spending a gazillion of dollars in huge monuments and cliche-full extravaganza parades and shows is more important than keeping a stable power & food supply..

..with the act of supporting a military invasion on these states.

So they may be NK apologists, but their apologism stems from a deep ... lack of logic, to use a kind characterisation.

In short, when fetishizing anti-imperialism, such bullshit occurs.

:rolleyes:

Yeah, because NKorea can't provide for their own people, right? WRONG! (http://sites.google.com/site/nzdprksociety/commentary/dprk-economy---food-production) Say another "socialist revolution" takes place in NKorea. Say the US doesn't take advantage of this by invading when they're weaker than ever. You actually think that, after this "pure workers state" is developed in NKorea, the imperialists are going to step down and relinquish their positions on strangling them to death through mass increase of sanctions!? Puhhleaseee! It'll look just like NKorea today, just under a new, weaker State. (not good at all!)

[scarletghoul]

What is so great about it?

I would rather be born in South Korea than in the North.
You mean the country that executed 1,200,000 communists in one summer.. that continues to imprison and torture people for being socialists, the country that has the worlds 2nd highest suicide rate, etc etc... South Korea is a disgusting fascist state, why would you want to live there ? Is the north really even worse than that ? how so ?

(though I guess you would be better off in the South if you're a liberal rather than a socialist.. )

[Nolan]

ARGGH APOLIGISRS

Fuck off.

[Nolan]

In which Korea will you get into deep shit for saying good things about the other?

The North, says the media.

Both, says reality.

[scarletghoul]

In which Korea will you get into deep shit for saying good things about the other?

The North, says the media.

Both, says reality.
You could say that about Nazi Germany and the USSR; what's your point.

[The Vegan Marxist]

In which Korea will you get into deep shit for saying good things about the other?

The North, says the media.

Both, says reality.

So you want to say good things about a capitalist country that imprisons your comrades for saying good things for a socialist country? And by what logic is this?

[Nolan]

So you want to say good things about a capitalist country that imprisons your comrades for saying good things for a socialist country? And by what logic is this?

Sometimes you're a jackass.

[The Vegan Marxist]

Sometimes you're a jackass.

Sometimes I have to be to point out the obvious fallacies.

[Dimentio]

I'd rather be born on Tahiti than in Sweden, so what's your point? People think it's easy to make a direct comparison between North and South Korea because they're both called "Korea" and lie close to each other, but of course there are massive differences.

In 1965, South Korea was actually poorer than the north.

[Dimentio]

You mean the country that executed 1,200,000 communists in one summer.. that continues to imprison and torture people for being socialists, the country that has the worlds 2nd highest suicide rate, etc etc... South Korea is a disgusting fascist state, why would you want to live there ? Is the north really even worse than that ? how so ?

(though I guess you would be better off in the South if you're a liberal rather than a socialist.. )

People in the south could actually protest against the government and their employers. In 1996, a general strike forced the businesses to increase wages nine times.

In South Korea, you could call the president a jack-ass. In North Korea, if you do that you are imprisoned as a traitor.

[Wanted Man]

In 1965, South Korea was actually poorer than the north.

That was then, and now is now.

One thing that's true is that in 1965, the comparison may have been a bit more relevant, because both countries had a lot of aid coming in from the US and USSR respectively, and they both had the chance to develop economically. Now, of course, that's not so evident. Especially when you consider that the North's terrain is much more difficult.

See: http://www.country-studies.com/north-korea/agriculture.html

[Nolan]

Sometimes I have to be to point out the obvious fallacies.

Except I said nothing of the sort.

But this is coming from the guy who supports the Nepalese Dengists and thinks China and Belarus are socialist. It's not too surprising.

[Nolan]

That was then, and now is now.

Wasn't that the case up to the collapse of the USSR?

[Dimentio]

That was then, and now is now.

One thing that's true is that in 1965, the comparison may have been a bit more relevant, because both countries had a lot of aid coming in from the US and USSR respectively, and they both had the chance to develop economically. Now, of course, that's not so evident. Especially when you consider that the North's terrain is much more difficult.

See: http://www.country-studies.com/north-korea/agriculture.html

The North was the industrial country of them both.

[Dimentio]

Wasn't that the case up to the collapse of the USSR?

No. In the 1970's and 1980's, South Korea began with a massive semi-state-capitalist development programme, which led to enormous industrial growth coupled with a huge human cost (it is for example quite prevalent amongst South Koreans born in the 70's and 80's to have developmental difficulties connected to famine and undernourishment).

[Triple A]

No. In the 1970's and 1980's, South Korea began with a massive semi-state-capitalist development programme, which led to enormous industrial growth coupled with a huge human cost (it is for example quite prevalent amongst South Koreans born in the 70's and 80's to have developmental difficulties connected to famine and undernourishment).


The fact is that north koreans that are not Jong-Il's family are starving.

[RedHal]

People in the south could actually protest against the government and their employers. In 1996, a general strike forced the businesses to increase wages nine times.

In South Korea, you could call the president a jack-ass. In North Korea, if you do that you are imprisoned as a traitor.

and there are no political prisoners in "democratic" states :rolleyes: So, yes you can ramble on about the president being a jack-ass, but don't do anything significant, otherwise you'll know how much "freedom of speech" there really is.

[The Vegan Marxist]

The fact is that north koreans that are not Jong-Il's family are starving.

No one's starving in NKorea like they were during the '90s. There's no evidence of starvation whatsoever. If we were to actually study the statistics on NKorea, we get a different outlook of them:

http://sites.google.com/site/nzdprksociety/commentary/dprk-economy---food-production

[The Vegan Marxist]

In South Korea, you could call the president a jack-ass. In North Korea, if you do that you are imprisoned as a traitor.

Do you have any concrete examples of people being thrown in jail for calling the President names?

[Palingenisis]

But this is coming from the guy who supports the Nepalese Dengists and thinks China and Belarus are socialist. It's not too surprising.

I dont think that China or Belarus are socialist....However calling the UCPN-M Dengists is either deliberate slander, gross ignorance or insanity.

[Rooster]

Surely the idea of a hereditary leadership is against common sense? Particularly if it's a supposed proletariat state.

[Nolan]

I dont think that China or Belarus are socialist....However calling the UCPN-M Dengists is either deliberate slander, gross ignorance or insanity.

It's hilarious that you call me ignorant when the Dengists put it in black and white - they want capitalism in Nepal.

[Spawn of Stalin]

Are there any real apologists for the North Korean regime here? Does anyone here actually support/defend the administration in North Korea? How can you?
The terrors in North Korea aren't blown up into misinformation like the American/Western media did to Cuba, USSR, China, and South America.
And you know this how? How are any of the other places lied about while the DPRK is exactly how it is portrayed in the media? Because Cuba has sunny beaches, big cigars, and crazy awesome dancing women, not to mention Mr. Pop Culture himself Che Guevara, while the USSR was a staple in progressive culture and had the great history behind it, including being largely responsible for the defeat of fascism. What the fuck has north Korea got? Bad weather and oppression. Your outlook is typically imperialist. By the way, all of the glorious socialist lands you mentioned which are the victims of imperialist slander supported the DPRK from its inception. So what do you even know about the DPRK?

[Spawn of Stalin]

Say hello to the CPGB-ML
(http://www.cpgb-ml.org/index.php?secName=proletarian&subName=display&art=680)
Don't single us out yo. It's not exactly out of the ordinary for a Marxist-Leninist party to support the DPRK, we're not the only ones in the world or even in Britain

[The Vegan Marxist]

It's hilarious that you call me ignorant when the Dengists put it in black and white - they want capitalism in Nepal.

Deng was a centrist who wanted no part in siding one over the other. His methods of "Market Socialism" was in some instances good to bring China out of underdevelopment, but it was long overused, allowing capitalist policies to flourish within China. As for trying to compare Deng with the Nepalese Maoists, they're going based on Mao's policies, not Deng's. They're forming New Democracy, not "market socialism". So yes, you are being quite ignorant.

[Kassad]

Sometimes you're a jackass.

You're not contributing anything to the discussion with posts like this. Consider this a verbal warning for flaming.

[Demogorgon]

I confess that I have difficulty believing that some people here really believe what they write. It is one thing to be wary of Western sources, quite another to conclude that North Korea must be a wonderful place. The thing about the media giving an inaccurate presentation about a place is that anyone inclined to do the research can find plenty of independent sources able to give an alternative account. With North Korea it is different, information is incredibly difficult to find, the information that comes from Government sources is laughably false and reads like they know nobody will believe it.

if North Korea was genuinely socialist, if the people did enjoy basic freedoms, if the standard of living was acceptable then the Government there would be doing everything in its power to show the world is, yet they maintain incredible secrecy like no other country on earth, why?

I see some people trying to play the "all countries have political prisoners card" or "South Korea is bad too", well all countries are somewhat lacking in terms of democratic rights, but it comes in different degrees, if North Korea had any degree of political freedom there would be examples of opposition media inside, there isn't. The South Korea excuse meanwhile is ridiculous. It might have been true thirty years ago but the dictatorship there collapsed under popular pressure, the political system there now is unremarkable, more like a slightly more authoritarian version of that of Japan than anything else, meanwhile North Korea maintains the political system it had back then. If they are honest with themselves there is nobody who would not prefer to live in Southern system as it exists now than in the North.

Before the usual suspects try to distract themselves from their own doubts with the usual rubbish, none of this is either to defend "imperialism" against the North which frankly would probably like the whole situation to go quiet for the time being anyway, nobody having the money necessary to invade the country. Nor is it to say the South Korea is some wonderful place, it isn't, but it is clearly preferable to that of the North, were that not the case then, as I say, the North would be doing everything in its power to demonstrate this. I don't see much evidence of that.

[Black Sheep]

You'd excpect from a demigod general secretary to at least provide 24/7 electricity.

[Nolan]

No. In the 1970's and 1980's, South Korea began with a massive semi-state-capitalist development programme, which led to enormous industrial growth coupled with a huge human cost (it is for example quite prevalent amongst South Koreans born in the 70's and 80's to have developmental difficulties connected to famine and undernourishment).

Do you have any source discussing that?

[Nolan]

Deng was a centrist who wanted no part in siding one over the other. His methods of "Market Socialism" was in some instances good to bring China out of underdevelopment, but it was long overused, allowing capitalist policies to flourish within China. As for trying to compare Deng with the Nepalese Maoists, they're going based on Mao's policies, not Deng's. They're forming New Democracy, not "market socialism". So yes, you are being quite ignorant.

"Market socialism" is capitalism.

And the Maoists came out and said they wanted capitalism. There's no argument.

[Nolan]

You're not contributing anything to the discussion with posts like this. Consider this a verbal warning for flaming.

Rushing in to defend your side, huh?

[Palingenisis]

The North was the industrial country of them both.

The north was also pretty fucked up to it mildly at the end of the war.

Anyway I consider the DPRK a Socialist country when I wouldnt say the same for example for Cuba, infact its very Socialist economy more than anything else is the reason that it draws much more scorn and indeed hatred for Imperialism and its propaganda than Cuba.

KCIoYNYNIj4

Moving set of videos from someone who was actually there.

[Palingenisis]

In which Korea will you get into deep shit for saying good things about the other?

The North, says the media.

Both, says reality.

And Socialist Albania was a shining example of political liberty? :rolleyes:

(Not that given the circumstances the limitations that it had on political liberty were not born in the majiority of cases by dire necesscity....But still, pot, kettle, black!).

[Nolan]

And Socialist Albania was a shining example of political liberty? :rolleyes:

Irrelevant.

And I don't know why you people are interpreting it that way...

[Palingenisis]

It's hilarious that you call me ignorant when the Dengists put it in black and white - they want capitalism in Nepal.

No what they want is economic development and not to repeat the mistakes made in Democratic Kampuchea....Anyway there are various line struggles within the UPCN-M and the situation is a lot more complex than you are making out.

[Nolan]

No what they want is economic development and not to repeat the mistakes made in Democratic Kampuchea....Anyway there are various line struggles within the UPCN-M and the situation is a lot more complex than you are making out.

I.e. they are revisionists that support capitalism and not a dictatorship of the proletariat.

And don't give me that shit. Albania had to raise itself out of feudalism and war ruin at the same time. What the Nepalese revisionists want is a capitalist economy of special economic zones.

[The American]

Please do point out this grand evidence of yours. I'd love to have it at hand next time I go to another imperialism-apologist meeting. :thumbup1:


Fake fur and real fur and jewelry and Jet Skis,

Crystal and Segways and bubbly and Caddies,

Race cars and leather and plasma TVs --

These are a few of Kim's favorite things.
....
The U.S. list of more than 60 items reads like a letter to Santa from the dictator who has everything. Yachts, water scooters, race cars, motorcycles, even station wagons and Segways won't be crossing the border this season. There shall be no more DVD players and televisions larger than 29 inches for the man whose film library of 20,000 titles betrays a yen for Bond and Rambo.

Kim's former chef has written that the man known as "Dear Leader" fancies sushi, Iranian caviar and shark-fin soup. He is said to have every grain of rice inspected for perfection. But he won't be served any of it on American china, which is on the list. After dinner, he often enjoys a glass of fine cognac -- so the United States put lead crystal and liquor on the list, too.

I would link you to the source but apparently I don't have enough posts to post links. Google what I just quoted.

[The Vegan Marxist]

I confess that I have difficulty believing that some people here really believe what they write. It is one thing to be wary of Western sources, quite another to conclude that North Korea must be a wonderful place. The thing about the media giving an inaccurate presentation about a place is that anyone inclined to do the research can find plenty of independent sources able to give an alternative account. With North Korea it is different, information is incredibly difficult to find, the information that comes from Government sources is laughably false and reads like they know nobody will believe it.

First you point out that it's incredibly difficult to find information on NKorea, yet then state that information provided by the NKorean state is laughable? I don't think you have a single clue on determining false information from truth. Hell, even the bourgeois historian Bruce Cumings states that in order to attain correct informational news of what's going on in NKorea, and the events taking place between them and the US, that you have to read NKorea's newspapers, not any of those of foreign media.

Second of all, no one's stating how "wonderful of a place it is", as if we envision NKorea as some utopia. We understand that NKorea is going through problems, but we don't show opposition to them just because they're going through some flaws, or because they're suffering from a mass increase of sanctions being brought against them by the US and allies.


if North Korea was genuinely socialist, if the people did enjoy basic freedoms, if the standard of living was acceptable then the Government there would be doing everything in its power to show the world is, yet they maintain incredible secrecy like no other country on earth, why?

What you read on their media and newspapers are usually what's going on there. I know plenty of people who goes there, and actually lives there, quite frequently who I can hook you up with on attaining information on what all's going on there.

The reason they don't allow much foreign media in their country at all is pretty much a given!


I see some people trying to play the "all countries have political prisoners card" or "South Korea is bad too", well all countries are somewhat lacking in terms of democratic rights, but it comes in different degrees, if North Korea had any degree of political freedom there would be examples of opposition media inside, there isn't. The South Korea excuse meanwhile is ridiculous. It might have been true thirty years ago but the dictatorship there collapsed under popular pressure, the political system there now is unremarkable, more like a slightly more authoritarian version of that of Japan than anything else, meanwhile North Korea maintains the political system it had back then. If they are honest with themselves there is nobody who would not prefer to live in Southern system as it exists now than in the North.

You're out of your mind if you think the dictatorship ended in SKorea. We've got plenty of people going to jail because they talk of good things about NKorea. There were a bunch of SKorean buddhist monks that went to NKorea to pray in one of their temples, and when they came back to SKorea they were locked up because of such.

Also, why should there be oppositional media present to have a people's democracy? Just to make sure the western-backed opposition has at least a chance in propagandizing their bullshit against NKorea and their people? That's a ridiculous statement.


Before the usual suspects try to distract themselves from their own doubts with the usual rubbish, none of this is either to defend "imperialism" against the North which frankly would probably like the whole situation to go quiet for the time being anyway, nobody having the money necessary to invade the country. Nor is it to say the South Korea is some wonderful place, it isn't, but it is clearly preferable to that of the North, were that not the case then, as I say, the North would be doing everything in its power to demonstrate this. I don't see much evidence of that.

The evidence is right there in front of you. You just laugh it off.

[Palingenisis]

I.e. they are revisionists that support capitalism and not a dictatorship of the proletariat.

And don't give me that shit. Albania had to raise itself out of feudalism and war ruin at the same time. What the Nepalese revisionists want is a capitalist economy of special economic zones.

Albania had help in the early years from the USSR and the People's Democracies, and than from the People's Republic of China. Its a different situation.

[The American]

And you know this how? How are any of the other places lied about while the DPRK is exactly how it is portrayed in the media? Because Cuba has sunny beaches, big cigars, and crazy awesome dancing women, not to mention Mr. Pop Culture himself Che Guevara, while the USSR was a staple in progressive culture and had the great history behind it, including being largely responsible for the defeat of fascism. What the fuck has north Korea got? Bad weather and oppression. Your outlook is typically imperialist. By the way, all of the glorious socialist lands you mentioned which are the victims of imperialist slander supported the DPRK from its inception. So what do you even know about the DPRK?

Just because Western media talks bad of a country doesn't mean that country is prosperous or at all successful. I'll be the last one to defend Western media, but you don't have to assume the opposite is true when you see western news. I've mentioned in a previous post that I detest Che Guevaras image. You've got one thing right though, North Korea has bad weather and oppression. Both attribute to famine and mass starvation. I sincerely hope you don't doubt the existence of the famine in the North in the 90s, no doubt the death toll was inflated by the west, but it happened, and the Kims spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on cognac and women while the rest of the North doesn't know where their next meal will come from. I don't doubt the DPRK was started with good intentions, but the Kims obviously don't care about the welfare of the North currently, and the only reason they haven't been dethroned is they've been made out to be actual divine gods in a sick cult of personality.
inb4 u a sheep

[Demogorgon]

First you point out that it's incredibly difficult to find information on NKorea, yet then state that information provided by the NKorean state is laughable? I don't think you have a single clue on determining false information from truth. Hell, even the bourgeois historian Bruce Cumings states that in order to attain correct informational news of what's going on in NKorea, and the events taking place between them and the US, that you have to read NKorea's newspapers, not any of those of foreign media.

Second of all, no one's stating how "wonderful of a place it is", as if we envision NKorea as some utopia. We understand that NKorea is going through problems, but we don't show opposition to them just because they're going through some flaws, or because they're suffering from a mass increase of sanctions being brought against them by the US and allies.

You are a case in point of what I was talking about, you don't believe your own rubbish and are trying to convince yourself far more than you are trying to convince anybody else. Do you realise just how absurd you sound when you claim that the State controlled media is the only accurate source when it comes to North Korea when its contents are such cack-handed attempts at propaganda? It would be one thing if it were sophisticated, but what we actually get?


What you read on their media and newspapers are usually what's going on there. I know plenty of people who goes there, and actually lives there, quite frequently who I can hook you up with on attaining information on what all's going on there.

The reason they don't allow much foreign media in their country at all is pretty much a given!

What is the reason, exactly? A country not allowing foreign media, particularly from countries that behave threateningly towards it is virtually unheard of, a country under threat traditionally goes to considerable lengths to present itself in a positive light to the citizens of a threatening country in the hope that they will put pressure on their Governments not to go to conflict.

Even without any immediate threat countries simply don't close themselves to foreign media unless they are desperately trying to hide how bad things are, again if North Korea was substantially better than it is portrayed it would do everything it possibly could to prove it, at the very least if it showed itself to be more prosperous or more free or whatever than it is portrayed then it would kill off any hope that the South Korean President has of being reelected and guarantee a more softline President would come to power. A more sympathetic Government in Seoul would be the best thing that could conceivably happen to the North Korean Government right now, if they could provide information that might lead to this don't you think they would be desperate to do so?


You're out of your mind if you think the dictatorship ended in SKorea. We've got plenty of people going to jail because they talk of good things about NKorea. There were a bunch of SKorean buddhist monks that went to NKorea to pray in one of their temples, and when they came back to SKorea they were locked up because of such. South Korea has a good number of problems including that it bans its citizens from travelling to North Korea, even when the North permits it, but the Dictatorship that was present in the eighties is gone and South Korea now has a Western political system, one that actually has considerably more debate and opposition than the American one, but I digress.


Also, why should there be oppositional media present to have a people's democracy? Just to make sure the western-backed opposition has at least a chance in propagandizing their bullshit against NKorea and their people? That's a ridiculous statement.

I find it hard to believe that you honestly believe what you just wrote. Do you really believe that people all think as one and that a free society can possibly have only one media voice representing it? Of course you don't, but you have to try and persuade yourself that you do for the sake of dealing with the cognitive dissonance that defending North Korea must bring. Even if you were right and there needn't be media opposed to the Government in general then there would still need to be media differences on individual policies (unless you hold to some racist notion that Koreans have lesser minds to the rest of us and can't cope with individual thoughts), yet there is no example of it.

[Palingenisis]

What are you doing on a leftist forum slagging off a small, beseiged but heroic Socialist country by mouthing off Imperialist propaganda and idealist criticism based on your own white skin privileges in the belly of the beast that completely ignore context that the DPRK finds itself in?

Oh sorry I forgot....:rolleyes:

[StalinFanboy]

Sometimes I have to be to point out the obvious fallacies.

The problem with this is that the post you made that's in question is not logical at all. Anytime someone criticizes the DPRK, you (and other people) immediately equate this to supporting US Imperialism. This is not logical by any means, and it's incredibly intellectually dishonest.





As something of a left communist, I think my stance here is fairly obvious. So I'm not going to go into that right now. I do want to ask one question though. There is a lot of talk on both sides of supporting this or that regime or people or whatever. What I want to know is what does this "support" that is the subject of so much heated argument actually amount to? As far as I know, no one on RevLeft is actually capable of supporting the DPRK in any meaningful way, and this support is really just posturing on the internet. It's almost as if ya'll think that by saying "I support the DPRK" there is some sort of magical process that channels your talk of support to the DPRK, thereby bolstering them against US Imperialism.


I bring this up because I think a lot of you have unhealthy and unrealistic visions of communists and the Left in general. It seems ya'll think as communists we are stronger and more relevant than we actually are.


All that being said, I don't think it is the role of pro-revolutionary communists to support either side when it comes to warring bourgeois factions. In this stage of capitalism, all nations are imperialist, and just because one imperialist power is losing, does mean we should support them, or talk of supporting them. As communists we should be encouraging in anyway possible the conversion of imperialist war into civil war on both sides. By "supporting" the DPRK over the USA or vice versa, you are supporting the slaughter of working class people at the hands of other working class people for the betterment of the ruling class.

[BogdanV]

If the DPRK is such a stalward proponent of progressive thought and socialist democracy, South Koreans are probably flocking to the border, like DDR citizens crossing the Wall, right ?
Hey! Probably that's why they also have a DMZ, to block people from reaching the blessed land of North Korean freedom !

Pardon me, I couldn't abstain...

And, last but not least : a democratic media (or atleast one that strives to such a goal) has no reason in hell to keep talking and boasting only about "the glorious acomplishments of Dear Leader" and only about anything related to "Dear Leader", "juche" and "The Party".
A democratic media would cover a long range of subjects, (including non-political) and would treat them with equal respect.
Using big words and pretty phrases goes quite ... uhm ... against the idealized objectiveness of the media.

Because, in the end, the role of the media is to serve information to the people in a unaltered, raw state, so that the reader/viewer can decide for him/herself what to believe.

To summarize, yes ... DPRK's one and only, state-funded media is the best source of information about the North.

[Kassad]

Rushing in to defend your side, huh?

No. You called him a jackass, which is in no way related to the topic and it is totally unnecessary. If you believe he is a defender of Stalinism/bureaucracy/state capitalism or whatever, call him on that. I'm not defending anything. You are just being immature.

[Demogorgon]

What are you doing on a leftist forum slagging off a small, beseiged but heroic Socialist country by mouthing off Imperialist propaganda and idealist criticism based on your own white skin privileges in the belly of the beast that completely ignore context that the DPRK finds itself in?

Oh sorry I forgot....:rolleyes:
I might ask what you are doing here with your third positionism and defence of anything that suits your ultra-authoritarian politics and contempt for human emancipation, but we already know the answer to that one, don't we?

[Palingenisis]

You dont even know what Third Positionism is....But I find being called one by an unconcious white nationalist slightly amusing. Human emancipation you say? In much a capitalist Asia which Im sure as much more humanly emancipated than the DPRK in your mind little girls as bred as cash crops to satisfy the perverted of Imperialism and frankly Im more interested in their liberation and in the defense of females in the DPRK from what counter-revolution offers them most surely than the "rights" of reactionaires to bring the gains of the revolution toppling to the ground.

[Dimentio]

You dont even know what Third Positionism is....But I find being called one by an unconcious white nationalist slightly amusing. Human emancipation you say? In much a capitalist Asia which Im sure as much more humanly emancipated than the DPRK in your mind little girls as bred as cash crops to satisfy the perverted of Imperialism and frankly Im more interested in their liberation and in the defense of females in the DPRK from what counter-revolution offers them most surely than the "rights" of reactionaires to bring the gains of the revolution toppling to the ground.

That was barely coherent. Still not recovered from the New Year's Party I'll cover?

[Palingenisis]

That was barely coherent. Still not recovered from the New Year's Party I'll cover?

Cheap slag...The point is plain...The trendies are oh so concerned about the emancipation of their counterparts in the DPRK to be fully fledged hipster trendy wankers. Im more concerned about the emancipation of the oppressed and working peoples of Asia from all the horrors that capitalism inflicts on them and the safeguarding of the people of the DPRK's liberation from the majiority of those horrors.

[scarletghoul]

People in the south could actually protest against the government and their employers. In 1996, a general strike forced the businesses to increase wages nine times.
You forget to mention the state's violent response to the strike.. And do you have any links about the wage thing, because I can't find anything about that; according to wikipedia the strike just forced the government to repeal some anti-labour laws

In South Korea, you could call the president a jack-ass. In North Korea, if you do that you are imprisoned as a traitor.
Yes I'd love to see at least a scrap of evidence of people being imprisoned for insulting Kim Jong-il. Though I suspect you don't have any and that this is just something you've heard in the news and repeated without thinking... (prove me wrong )

It's hilarious that you call me ignorant when the Dengists put it in black and white - they want capitalism in Nepal.
Lenin wanted capitalism in Russia. There's never been a socialist revolution in a poor country that doesnt use at least some capitalist relations in its early years. Though I guess thats too much to comprehend for your useless and deluded hoxhaist mind. go wank over your albanian stamp collection, instead of bothering people who are discussing existing revolutions

[Demogorgon]

You dont even know what Third Positionism is....But I find being called one by an unconcious white nationalist slightly amusing. Human emancipation you say? In much a capitalist Asia which Im sure as much more humanly emancipated than the DPRK in your mind little girls as bred as cash crops to satisfy the perverted of Imperialism and frankly Im more interested in their liberation and in the defense of females in the DPRK from what counter-revolution offers them most surely than the "rights" of reactionaires to bring the gains of the revolution toppling to the ground.
I'm a white nationalist now, am I? I'm not entirely sure where that came from, but I'll follow Dimentio's lead and give you the benefit of the doubt in presuming that you are drunk.

Once again, it is perfectly plain to me what your political preferences are and they sure as hell aren't progressive. From one thread to another you have no purpose it seems other than to promote the most authoritarian and reactionary agenda possible, it is getting tiresome.

[The Vegan Marxist]

If the DPRK is such a stalward proponent of progressive thought and socialist democracy, South Koreans are probably flocking to the border, like DDR citizens crossing the Wall, right ?
Hey! Probably that's why they also have a DMZ, to block people from reaching the blessed land of North Korean freedom !

Because, despite how much the State is able to give to their people (http://sites.google.com/site/nzdprksociety/commentary/dprk-economy---food-production), there's still two problems that puts NKorea in a position where not many will want to live there at the current time with those who have chosen to stay:

They don't have enough land for agriculture to produce an adequate amount of food for their people. No one's starving, per se, but not everyone is able to have proper amounts due to such. They call for at least 20% of their food sourcing to be aided to them by foreign help.
They've been struggling for years due to the mass increase of sanctions being brought against them by the US and its allies. This has resulted to a lot of aid not being able to pass to the DPRK, along with many medicines not being granted to them as well.



And, last but not least : a democratic media (or atleast one that strives to such a goal) has no reason in hell to keep talking and boasting only about "the glorious acomplishments of Dear Leader" and only about anything related to "Dear Leader", "juche" and "The Party".
A democratic media would cover a long range of subjects, (including non-political) and would treat them with equal respect.
Using big words and pretty phrases goes quite ... uhm ... against the idealized objectiveness of the media.

Seeing you rant about this to me just shows how very little of DPRK's media you really read. With just their main online media alone, 1/3 of the media only pertains about their leaders. The rest talks about the current aggressive ambitions being pursued by Western imperialists, meetings taking place within the WPK, and economic development that's being pursued by the people of the DPRK.

Being able to know people who visit the DPRK and lives there also helps me come in possession of video's that - get this - talk little of their leaders and more about their economic developments and advancements! I remember watching a video where it talked about the increased advancements being done by the NKorean miners, and then went on to talk about the largest skyscraper in the world being developed, which is in the DPRK.

So whether you like it or not, the DPRK's media goes on a diverse range of topics. You just refuse to read, nor try and find media within the DPRK.

[Dimentio]

If North Korea is so great, why is virtually all of the country except for central Pyongyang shut off from the surrounding world?

[Sensible Socialist]

Have a damn election, will you?

[The Vegan Marxist]

If North Korea is so great, why is virtually all of the country except for central Pyongyang shut off from the surrounding world?

It's actually not. If you were to watch the CPGB-ML's video of where all the comrade visited, you'd realize he covered a great deal:

http://redantliberationarmy.wordpress.com/2010/11/15/video-cpgb-mls-reality-check-report-on-democratic-korea-dprk/

Also, if you simply talked to all those provided below, who are either visitors of the DPRK or actually live there, then I'm sure they'd be more than welcome to help find out more of the DPRK and its surroundings:

http://www.facebook.com/bjornar.simonsen

http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100001355035460

http://www.facebook.com/alejandrocaodebenos

http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100001008133443

http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000798542835

http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1450354854

http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1507677334

http://www.facebook.com/treveraritz

http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100001052152510

http://www.facebook.com/Malvalone

http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=588102033

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Viva-Corea-del-Norte/101495862343

[Manic Impressive]

erm probably best not to post peoples FB pages, do you even have their permission? or are they all fake pages, shit they could all be yours for all we know.

also I'm going to try and arrange a holiday to DPRK

[The Vegan Marxist]

erm probably best not to post peoples FB pages, do you even have their permission? or are they all fake pages, shit they could all be yours for all we know.

also I'm going to try and arrange a holiday to DPRK

They don't mind. And no, they're not my pages. I've never been to the DPRK, so there's no way I could acquire the pictures they provide. I wish I can someday though. :thumbup1:

[craigd89]

You mean the country that executed 1,200,000 communists in one summer.. that continues to imprison and torture people for being socialists, the country that has the worlds 2nd highest suicide rate, etc etc... South Korea is a disgusting fascist state, why would you want to live there ? Is the north really even worse than that ? how so ?

(though I guess you would be better off in the South if you're a liberal rather than a socialist.. )

I'm half korean and have been to South Korea before.. The country is beautiful and peaceful...and South Korean workers are some of the most militant in the world..I cant say the same about North korea

[BIG BROTHER]

Just a quick question for DPRK's apologizt who argue that all the bad stuff about N. Korea is propaganda.

Why is it that Cuba does not receive the same anywhere near the same amount of bad news N. Korea says? In fact even in UN reports, independent media, books you can find out about not only negative but positive things about Cuba that it has over other Imperialist countries, the most famous one being the healthcare system.

funny how that doesn't happen with the DPRK lol

[The Vegan Marxist]

Just a quick question for DPRK's apologizt who argue that all the bad stuff about N. Korea is propaganda.

Why is it that Cuba does not receive the same anywhere near the same amount of bad news N. Korea says? In fact even in UN reports, independent media, books you can find out about not only negative but positive things about Cuba that it has over other Imperialist countries, the most famous one being the healthcare system.

funny how that doesn't happen with the DPRK lol

Are you stating that the conditions of the DPRK and its relation to active imperialist attacks against them is similar to that of Cuba?

1) Cuba isn't attached to another country that's being funded economically and militarily by Western-imperialists.
2) The DPRK's military is no where near the scale of SKorea's and the US's (http://sites.google.com/site/nzdprksociety/commentary/the-dprk-is-not-a-strong-military-power-by-hazel-smith--professor-of-international-relations--warick-university). Leaving the DPRK more vulnerable than Cuba.
3) Sanctions against the DPRK is far more numerous than it is against Cuba.

When Cuba was in a similar position to that of the DPRK's, there was very little information coming in from Cuba. Though, as Americans, we live a lot closer to Cuba than we do to the DPRK. I'm sure many SKoreans or Chinese are able to acquire a lot more info within the DPRK than we do as Americans.

And when it comes to the topic of healthcare, the DPRK has the ability of providing their people with adequate free healthcare, as does Cuba. WHO (World Health Organization) stated this as well (http://www.voanews.com/english/news/asia/WHO-Chief-Notes-N-Korean-Achievements-in-Public-Health-Care-92541349.html). Though, due to the sanctions, they're not able to attain a large portion of certain medications (http://www.timbeal.net.nz/geopolitics/Medicines.pdf) needed. This also effects their developments - ranging from industrialization to agriculture.

[PilesOfDeadNazis]

Just because Western media talks bad of a country doesn't mean that country is prosperous or at all successful. I'll be the last one to defend Western media, but you don't have to assume the opposite is true when you see western news. I've mentioned in a previous post that I detest Che Guevaras image. You've got one thing right though, North Korea has bad weather and oppression. Both attribute to famine and mass starvation. I sincerely hope you don't doubt the existence of the famine in the North in the 90s, no doubt the death toll was inflated by the west, but it happened, and the Kims spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on cognac and women while the rest of the North doesn't know where their next meal will come from. I don't doubt the DPRK was started with good intentions, but the Kims obviously don't care about the welfare of the North currently, and the only reason they haven't been dethroned is they've been made out to be actual divine gods in a sick cult of personality.
inb4 u a sheep
Why did you ignore my question? Again, where did you get all of this information if not from Imperialist media? I'm not asking a lot. If you KNOW that all of that is true, I want to know how you know all of this. Have you been to the DPRK? Have you even taken in to account the reports from places like the CPGB-ML or are you going by what you have heard through Western media?

You are entitled to your opinion on NKorea, but you should look at all sides of the story before you come to such conclusions and so far you have not proven that you have gathered any information from anywhere other than biased, anti-Socialist media.

If the Western media was wrong about the USSR, Cuba, etc. why are they not wrong with the DPRK? You do know the USSR supported the DPRK, right?

[MarxSchmarx]

If North Korea is so great, why is virtually all of the country except for central Pyongyang shut off from the surrounding world?

Speaking of which I don't think I've come across a poster who even claims to be from North Korea here.There are English speakers there, I know, who have access to the internet. We have had people from South Korea, Cuba and even China, but I don't believe a single North Korean. If it's as open and democratic as its defenders claim, I wonder why this is:rolleyes:

EDIT: By the way, I am not referring to north korean passport holders living abroad like some Koreans in Japan for example or the KFA folk with naturalized North Korean citizenship known to drop by the fatherland every so often.


Have a damn election, will you? Kim Jong Il will win in a landslide. This is one reason why South Korea, for example, doesn't call for free elections in the north.

[The Vegan Marxist]

I'm half korean and have been to South Korea before.. The country is beautiful and peaceful...and South Korean workers are some of the most militant in the world..I cant say the same about North korea

If the country is so peaceful, then why are the workers so militant? This type of contradiction leads us to believe that one of your statements is false. May I recommend the former being the false tale, and the latter being true? :thumbup1:

[Os Cangaceiros]

Speaking of which I don't think I've come across a poster who even claims to be from North Korea here.There are English speakers there, I know, who have access to the internet. We have had people from South Korea, Cuba and even China, but I don't believe a single North Korean. If it's as open and democratic as its defenders claim, I wonder why this is:rolleyes:

There actually was a poster here who claimed to be from the DPRK at one point (although I think he was probably full of it). He was banned for homophobic remarks, though, IIRC.

[Os Cangaceiros]

Actually I think that I'm mistaken...I was thinking of this poster:

http://www.revleft.com/vb/member.php?u=18145

[BIG BROTHER]

Are you stating that the conditions of the DPRK and its relation to active imperialist attacks against them is similar to that of Cuba?

1) Cuba isn't attached to another country that's being funded economically and militarily by Western-imperialists.
2) The DPRK's military is no where near the scale of SKorea's and the US's (http://sites.google.com/site/nzdprksociety/commentary/the-dprk-is-not-a-strong-military-power-by-hazel-smith--professor-of-international-relations--warick-university). Leaving the DPRK more vulnerable than Cuba.
3) Sanctions against the DPRK is far more numerous than it is against Cuba.

When Cuba was in a similar position to that of the DPRK's, there was very little information coming in from Cuba. Though, as Americans, we live a lot closer to Cuba than we do to the DPRK. I'm sure many SKoreans or Chinese are able to acquire a lot more info within the DPRK than we do as Americans.

And when it comes to the topic of healthcare, the DPRK has the ability of providing their people with adequate free healthcare, as does Cuba. WHO (World Health Organization) stated this as well (http://www.voanews.com/english/news/asia/WHO-Chief-Notes-N-Korean-Achievements-in-Public-Health-Care-92541349.html). Though, due to the sanctions, they're not able to attain a large portion of certain medications (http://www.timbeal.net.nz/geopolitics/Medicines.pdf) needed. This also effects their developments - ranging from industrialization to agriculture.

Cuba is next to the world's biggest Imperialist Power...

Even those who are against the regime in Cuba don't say anything about it that is anywhere near to the horrible shit defector's from N. Korea say.

And yea the DPRK doesn't charge for healthcare...because you can't really charge people for giving them nothing...and by adequate I guess you mean re-using needles and shit like that....

Just face it, you would never live in the DPRK because you would hate it there, probably starved and incarcerating for not following the "Dear Leader's" wishes. I'm sure any worker in N. Korea who knew about a middle class white boy defending their oppresive regime would feel like its some kind of sick joke.

[The Vegan Marxist]

Cuba is next to the world's biggest Imperialist Power...

Even those who are against the regime in Cuba don't say anything about it that is anywhere near to the horrible shit defector's from N. Korea say.

And yea the DPRK doesn't charge for healthcare...because you can't really charge people for giving them nothing...and by adequate I guess you mean re-using needles and shit like that....

Just face it, you would never live in the DPRK because you would hate it there, probably starved and incarcerating for not following the "Dear Leader's" wishes. I'm sure any worker in N. Korea who knew about a middle class white boy defending their oppresive regime would feel like its some kind of sick joke.

You're obviously of no hope whatsoever. I provide actual linked evidence of statistical backgrounds on the DPRK, the causes of its suffering, and at what extent they're suffering from. Not to mention what they're able to give to their people, despite the suffering, and yet all you can come up with is slanderous remarks against the DPRK through bullshit claims without evidence!

And yeah, the Cuba is next to the imperialist beast, though that's not the point, is it? Cuba doesn't have a neighbor, nor someone attached to them, that's being massively funded by the imperialist beast, both economically and militarily. Hell, the only thing the US is able to remain to bring against Cuba is the trade embargo. Yet, unlike the DPRK (for now), Cuba has the entire world on their side, demanding an end to the trade embargo, except for the US and Israel!

http://www2.pslweb.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=14679&news_iv_ctrl=1261

THAT's why there's a major difference between Cuba and the DPRK. It has nothing to do with their economic systems - given that the DPRK has a more collective, centralized economy than Cuba anyways!

So go and disregard all the evidence you want. I really don't give a fuck what you think, quite frankly.

[PilesOfDeadNazis]

And yea the DPRK doesn't charge for healthcare...because you can't really charge people for giving them nothing...and by adequate I guess you mean re-using needles and shit like that....
And every evening, after a dinner of mud-water and air, the people of North Korea are forced to sit down and watch Kim Jong Il dine on a hearty feast of sirloin steak and live puppies...

Seriously, where the fuck did you get this information? A link or two would be appreciated. Links which prove that the DPRK gives zero healthcare and yet re-use needles(for what purpose?).

Also, Cuba's geographical position doesn't prove shit. The situations are vastly different, despite who's closer to the US.

[Wanted Man]

Actually I think that I'm mistaken...I was thinking of this poster:

http://www.revleft.com/vb/member.php?u=18145

Yeah, he's actually from Canada, but perhaps with Korean parents or something.


If North Korea is so great, why is virtually all of the country except for central Pyongyang shut off from the surrounding world?

Nobody thinks it's "so great", so what are people even talking about? This is the kind of stupid playground bullshit that would never go without comment if it were on any other subject.

"Err, I think John isn't such a bad guy, really."
"Well if you love him so much, why don't you marry him?"


Just a quick question for DPRK's apologizt who argue that all the bad stuff about N. Korea is propaganda.

Why is it that Cuba does not receive the same anywhere near the same amount of bad news N. Korea says? In fact even in UN reports, independent media, books you can find out about not only negative but positive things about Cuba that it has over other Imperialist countries, the most famous one being the healthcare system.

funny how that doesn't happen with the DPRK lol

HORRIBLE CUBAN STALINIST TORTUREZ1!111!! (http://www.cubanet.org/CNews/y03/nov03/10e8.htm)

CHE KILLED CHILDREN!!!1 (http://www.lewrockwell.com/fontova/fontova44.html)

MORE TORTURE! (http://www.hrw.org/en/news/1999/07/22/cuba-silences-dissent-abuses-oppressive-laws)

IF IT's SO GREAT IN CUBA, WHY CAN'T PEOPLE LEAVE??? (http://www.hrw.org/legacy/english/docs/2006/01/18/cuba12207.htm)

CUBAN HEALTHCARE SUX0RZ!!!1 (http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/12/29/105902/wikileaks-cables-highlight-cubas.html)

CASTRO LIVES IN BIG PALACES WHILE TEH PEOPLE STARVE!! (http://www.therealcuba.com/Castro%20the%20multimillionaire.htm)

CUBAN SNATCH SQUADS!!! (http://www.desdecuba.com/generationy/?p=1123)

If you deny any of this you're a Stalinist and apologist.

[Apoi_Viitor]

I find it amusing when supporters of the North Korean government refuse to listen to sources from "westerners" or "imperialists". Any source from an anarchist, libertarian socialist, or any capitalist reactionary is automatically discredited because it's just "propaganda" that has no facts or basis. (This definitely doesn't exclude every source except for those who support the North Korean government...) Of course, only the section of Marxist-Leninism that supports North Korea is reliable for their information - because when they take a trip to North Korea and declare that everything is amazing, they aren't motivated by any idealogical bias. But when some capitalist takes a trip to North Korea and declares that it is a humanitarian disaster, they are just spreading bourgeios propaganda.

The Kim Jong Sung / Kim Jong-Il apologists are willing to look at all the evidence regarding the conditions of North Korea (except for those that look badly upon the North Korean government)...

[craigd89]

If the country is so peaceful, then why are the workers so militant? This type of contradiction leads us to believe that one of your statements is false. May I recommend the former being the false tale, and the latter being true? :thumbup1:
What I meant was you don't have to worry about getting shot or mugged when walking around in the city even in the "ghetto" parts. I meant the people there are friendlier and more open then people in the US. Fuck North Korea.. I think getting hit with batons is a step up from rounding unionists and executing them or throwing them in a labor camp. You need to leave your little fantasy world

[The Vegan Marxist]

What I meant was you don't have to worry about getting shot or mugged when walking around in the city even in the "ghetto" parts. I meant the people there are friendlier and more open then people in the US. Fuck North Korea.. I think getting hit with batons is a step up from rounding unionists and executing them or throwing them in a labor camp. You need to leave your little fantasy world

Is that why SKorea locks up everyone that shows support or praise towards NKorea? It's you who needs to step away from whatever fantasy you live in.

[The Vegan Marxist]

I find it amusing when supporters of the North Korean government refuse to listen to sources from "westerners" or "imperialists". Any source from an anarchist, libertarian socialist, or any capitalist reactionary is automatically discredited because it's just "propaganda" that has no facts or basis. (This definitely doesn't exclude every source except for those who support the North Korean government...) Of course, only the section of Marxist-Leninism that supports North Korea is reliable for their information - because when they take a trip to North Korea and declare that everything is amazing, they aren't motivated by any idealogical bias. But when some capitalist takes a trip to North Korea and declares that it is a humanitarian disaster, they are just spreading bourgeios propaganda.

The Kim Jong Sung / Kim Jong-Il apologists are willing to look at all the evidence regarding the conditions of North Korea (except for those that look badly upon the North Korean government)...

First of all, it's Kim Il-Sung. lol

Second of all, nice not providing evidence. It's the ML's who's provided evidence as a matter of fact. I provided plenty, and yet you come about, stating we're disregarding the evidence? HAH! Hell, even bourgeois historians like Bruce Cumings states the exact opposite of what some capitalist who's never been there about the DPRK. We've got the experts on the Korean region, such people like Bruce Cumings and Tim Beal, yet when they state the opposite of what Western papers say, oh they must be apologists, right? :rolleyes:

[The Vegan Marxist]

And so the crickets start chirping. Is this enough evidence for everyone? Has me, Killer Enigma, Scarletghoul, Palingenisis, and PilesOfDeadNazis provided enough to show you why we should support the DPRK?

[psgchisolm]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SrJMVJyzEp0

vid is probably a couple of years old so things might have changed a little.

[Rooster]

It's interesting that Bruce Cumings' name has been brought up. I wonder what makes his point of view any more credible?

[Apoi_Viitor]

First of all, it's Kim Il-Sung. lol


Also, if you can read peruvian, or at least got a good translator program, you can check out the book written by former leader of the Shining Path, Abimael Guzman, which is called "De puño y letra":

First of all, it's spanish. lol.


And so the crickets start chirping. Is this enough evidence for everyone? Has me, Killer Enigma, Scarletghoul, Palingenisis, and PilesOfDeadNazis provided enough to show you why we should support the DPRK?

Well, let's see?


Dr. Margaret Chan, the WHO Director-General, delivered a summary of a much longer report she put together on the North Korean health care system in April 2010, in which she wrote:

"I was impressed with some of the notable public health achievements

Yeh, well...


The WHO, [I]on its own website, has a section for child malnutrition statistics in NK. From its "Country cooperation strategy": "The health of women and children is a key priority [of the WHO] in DPR Korea" (p.47). Probability of dying under 5 is 55/1000. In the US it's 8/1000 (here's the site: http://www.who.int/countries/prk/en/).

The Guardian says that an Amnesty International report into NK said "The report identifies children, elderly people and pregnant women as "particularly vulnerable to food insecurity and malnutrition due to their dietary needs"." (the link is here: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jul/15/north-korea-health-crisis-amnesty

Did you think that we wouldn't bother to look at the WHO site or check your "facts"?

...


most of the folks on here won't ever change their mind and--more importantly--won't amount to anything in the people's struggle.

Like this lady... She couldn't 'amount to anything in the people's struggle'.
http://www.nationalpost.com/news/world/North+Korean+gulag+survivor+tells+years+hell/3143911/story.html

But anyways, when the North Korean State collapses, the result will be somewhat similar to what happened after the destruction of Khmer Rouge - by that I mean, 1. the average North Korean's life will get insurmountably better and 2. a lot of comrades will look like total idiots for supporting the previous North Korean State.

But really, is this enough evidence for everyone?


North Korea is hard for me to decide whether I should support it. Especially after watching this stuff:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5385077659281273870#
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1875007335054132657#

Call it "bourgeois propaganda" all you want but I seriously detest that it can't provide for it's people and yet (some) ML's call it socialist. I'm not looking for "pure socialism" no, but the state North Korea is in, is not to be defended.


I dont get it. North Korea claims to want to be "self-reliant" right? So how exactly would economic sanctions from the US cause problems if they want to be "self-reliant"?


There's a good amount of video footage that has been smuggled out of North Korea...

http://www.dailynk.com/english/read.php?cataId=nk00100&num=391

http://www.dailynk.com/english/read.php?cataId=nk00100&num=399

http://www.dailynk.com/english/read.php?cataId=nk00100&num=427


Doesn't it strike any of you PRO-DPRK types as unusual (and explicitly anti-socialist) that there seems to be a hereditary system (whether formal or not) of transfer of power?


If this represents any measure of success:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OyicsVcd28c
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A_268_pBvPs&feature=fvw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QFxvvd-l6-w&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=93mxwmGYa-Y&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HI93iLkNnV8&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p7RtFZCpyv0&feature=related

I'd hate to see their failures...

Let me guess, this is all just Western bourgeois propaganda?


feels like these guys are preaching to the converted, and doesn't seem biased at all. The day tourists can wander around freely in DPRK i'll be less sceptical.


You mean working class people like Kim Jong-il? A man who's titles run to Chairman of the National Defence Commission, General Secretary of the Workers Party of Korea, Supreme Commander of the Korean People's Army and Supreme Leader. This man must be a genius to hold onto these positions uninterupted for so long in the face of what, in your estimation, is a thriving workers democracy.

Or may be you're referring to that other titan of the proletariat, Kim Jong-un, Kim Jong-il's son and heir apparent. His elevation must be a further example of how the state is "run by working class people".

Meanwhile, if the state is indeed subject to the will of the working people, why are the workers of South Korea not flocking over the border to join the workers paradise?

I guess they must be the duped idiots of imperialism, right?

[The Vegan Marxist]

First of all, it's spanish. lol.

OHHHH SHIT! You got me. Must feel proud, eh? :rolleyes:


Well, let's see?

Yeh, well...

And what exactly did you expect when a country is asking for 20% of its agriculture to be helped acquired through foreign aid, yet cannot receive such due to mass increase of sanctions? This isn't the DPRK's fault. Unless you're going to come up with some odd idea that the DPRK designed the country by hand and deliberately made it to where they're not able to build up enough agriculture to adequately feed their people properly!

Oh wait...I already pointed that out earlier in the thread. Amazing what happens when someone refuses or just completely disregards what we present. It's like they don't care and just go off to find whatever article they can find to throw dirt on the DPRK...nahhhh..that can't be it. :rolleyes:


Like this lady... She couldn't 'amount to anything in the people's struggle'.
http://www.nationalpost.com/news/world/North+Korean+gulag+survivor+tells+years+hell/3143911/story.html

She was talking about the DPRK during the '90s. You know, when starvation was actually real in the DPRK! And yeah, a lot of mistakes were made and some terrible shit could've happened. But does that put into account the present conditions taking place? Or should we dig up terrible shit everywhere and then say "overthrow them because of their past!"?

[Apoi_Viitor]

She was talking about the DPRK during the '90s. You know, when starvation was actually real in the DPRK! And yeah, a lot of mistakes were made and some terrible shit could've happened. But does that put into account the present conditions taking place? Or should we dig up terrible shit everywhere and then say "overthrow them because of their past!"?

She was put in a gulag...

[The Vegan Marxist]

She was put in a gulag...

Supposedly. The Iranian scientist kidnapped to the US stated a lot of bullshit too. I don't think it holds much credibility. It's still out of pure assumption. It also contradicts that of the experts on the Korean region, such as those of Cumings and Beal.

[psgchisolm]

And what exactly did you expect when a country is asking for 20% of its agriculture to be helped acquired through foreign aid, yet cannot receive such due to mass increase of sanctions? This isn't the DPRK's fault. Unless you're going to come up with some odd idea that the DPRK designed the country by hand and deliberately made it to where they're not able to build up enough agriculture to adequately feed their people properly!


She was talking about the DPRK during the '90s. You know, when starvation was actually real in the DPRK! And yeah, a lot of mistakes were made and some terrible shit could've happened. But does that put into account the present conditions taking place? Or should we dig up terrible shit everywhere and then say "overthrow them because of their past!"?
1. No one forced them to shell civilians with HighExplosive Artillery.
2. No one forced them to attack any South Korean Warships. North Korea provokes some of the sanctions it gets.
3.Perhaps if they went to the diplomatic table and called for peace they would have enough time to industialize and possible feed their population. 4.Instead of wasting money on showing how powerful your military is and wasting money and all of the little resources he has on them he could consider downsizing his military.
5. Who says starvation isn't real now? If it needs 20% of it's agriculture to be helped by foreign aid like you said why would you think this has changed?
Is this DPRKs fault, in my opinion yes. Did they intend for it to be this way? No, of course not. but if you're in the same position you were 10+ years ago why wouldn't you consider changing. Kim dug them their ditch, if he really cared about his "workers" why wouldn't he call for a peace treaty to actually GET some foreign aid.

[Burn A Flag]

You mean the country that executed 1,200,000 communists in one summer.. that continues to imprison and torture people for being socialists, the country that has the worlds 2nd highest suicide rate, etc etc... South Korea is a disgusting fascist state, why would you want to live there ? Is the north really even worse than that ? how so ?

(though I guess you would be better off in the South if you're a liberal rather than a socialist.. )

Could someone please source this I find it fascinating

[Apoi_Viitor]

Supposedly. The Iranian scientist kidnapped to the US stated a lot of bullshit too. I don't think it holds much credibility. It's still out of pure assumption. It also contradicts that of the experts on the Korean region, such as those of Cumings and Beal.

But see, I fundamentally doubt that, due to the numerous stories which have come from citizens who have escaped North Korea. It's similar to Khmer Rouge, where there was not just simply a few horror stories, but a large number of them. I'm interested though, in why there are such a small number of tales such as these from Cuba, China, and the East-European Communist States, where as one can find an enumerate number of tales from North Koreans. This makes me doubt that these stories come from bourgeios imperialists who are ideologically motivated to smear socialist regimes, but rather that they come from actual victims of the North Korean state.

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

People in the south could actually protest against the government and their employers. In 1996, a general strike forced the businesses to increase wages nine times.

In South Korea, you could call the president a jack-ass. In North Korea, if you do that you are imprisoned as a traitor.

"The National Security Law is a South Korean law which has the avowed purpose 'to restrict anti-state acts that endanger national security and to protect [the] nation's safety and its people's life and freedom.'

"Based on the Law for Maintenance of the Public Security of the Japanese Korea, it was passed in 1948, and made illegal both communism and recognition of North Korea as a political entity. It has been reformed and strengthened with the passing of the times. The Anti-communism Law was merged into the National Security Law during the 1980s....

"This law has been regularly blamed for restricting freedom of speech:

* Citizens may not join an organization with aims to overthrow the government;
* Citizens may not create, distribute or possess materials that promote anti-government ideas;
* Citizens may not neglect to report others who violate this law.

"For instance, in 1998, Mr. Ha Young-Joon (하영준), a graduate student at Hanyang University formerly active with the International Socialists movement, was tried and sentenced to 8 months in prison for having summarized and made available online Chris Harman and Alex Callinicos's main writings on South Korea's national BBS network, in violation of NSA Article 7 Clauses 1 and 5.

"In 2002, Mr. Lee, a new recruit in the South Korean army, was sentenced to 2 years in prison for having said 'I think Korean separation is not North Korean but American fault' to fellow soldiers. The Military Prosecutor's Office could not charge him for what he had said, but it searched Mr. Lee's civilian house and found various books, and charged him in violation of the NSA Article 7 Clauses 1 and 5.

"Other well-known uses of the National Security act include the 1999 banning of students' union Hanchongryun and the 2003 spy case against Song Du-yul, a Korean living in Germany. The severest penalty that could be given according to NSL is the death penalty. The best-known example of death penalty is People's Revolutionary Party Incident." - Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Security_Act_%28South_Korea%29)


"...[South] Korea’s own music media censorship laws (which even in 1997 prohibited the displaying of body piercings, navels, tattoos, 'outfits which might harm the sound emotional development of youth,' and banned violent or political lyrics)..." - Cultural Studies and Cultural Industries in Northeast Asia: What a Difference a Region Makes, pp. 156

[Cooler Reds Will Prevail]

It's actually not. If you were to watch the CPGB-ML's video of where all the comrade visited, you'd realize he covered a great deal:

http://redantliberationarmy.wordpress.com/2010/11/15/video-cpgb-mls-reality-check-report-on-democratic-korea-dprk/

Also, if you simply talked to all those provided below, who are either visitors of the DPRK or actually live there, then I'm sure they'd be more than welcome to help find out more of the DPRK and its surroundings:

http://www.facebook.com/bjornar.simonsen

http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100001355035460

http://www.facebook.com/alejandrocaodebenos

http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100001008133443

http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000798542835

http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1450354854

http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1507677334

http://www.facebook.com/treveraritz

http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100001052152510

http://www.facebook.com/Malvalone

http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=588102033

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Viva-Corea-del-Norte/101495862343


I can't speak on all these people, but Alejandro Cao de Benos (3rd on list) is a fucking nutjob Spanish aristocrat who parades around in a DPRK military uniform. He organized a delegation to the DPRK a few years back as leader of the Korean Friendship Association and ended up breaking into the bedroom of a journalist companion and stealing all his film, because of reported complaints from DPRK officials regarding what he was filming (and they were on a government-led trip, by the way). He even admitted to such, and defended his actions on the basis that this journalist (who he invited) was harming the DPRK. It's a little wacky when the DPRK gets angry at journalists for filming on the state-approved tour.

Bjornar Simonsen (1st on list) also once referred to the DPRK as a "workers' paradise." LMAO.

[The Vegan Marxist]

1. No one forced them to shell civilians with HighExplosive Artillery.
2. No one forced them to attack any South Korean Warships. North Korea provokes some of the sanctions it gets.
3.Perhaps if they went to the diplomatic table and called for peace they would have enough time to industialize and possible feed their population. 4.Instead of wasting money on showing how powerful your military is and wasting money and all of the little resources he has on them he could consider downsizing his military.
5. Who says starvation isn't real now? If it needs 20% of it's agriculture to be helped by foreign aid like you said why would you think this has changed?
Is this DPRKs fault, in my opinion yes. Did they intend for it to be this way? No, of course not. but if you're in the same position you were 10+ years ago why wouldn't you consider changing. Kim dug them their ditch, if he really cared about his "workers" why wouldn't he call for a peace treaty to actually GET some foreign aid.

1. SKorea didn't have to fire artillery first on NKorean shores, as according to international law.
2. They never fired a torpedo, nor sunk the SKorean Cheonan. The experts agree that NKorea was not involved whatsoever.
3. They have gone to the diplomatic tables and asked for peace, if you ever read something called...get this...the news! The US have refused to participate through 6 way talks, which the DPRK have agreed upon.
4. Downsizing the military? :laugh: Their military is a fucking pipsqueak compared to the US's and SKorea's military! Why the fuck would they downsize it when they're being threatened by the imperialists? Are you fucking stupid?
5. Because, even the WHO (World Health Organization) denies these charges. The furthest they've gone is state that there's malnutrition present. On the other hand, those who've never stepped a single foot on the DPRK have stated otherwise, crying starvation. :rolleyes:

[Cane Nero]

Say another "socialist revolution" takes place in NKorea. Say the US doesn't take advantage of this by invading when they're weaker than ever. You actually think that, after this "pure workers state" is developed in NKorea, the imperialists are going to step down and relinquish their positions on strangling them to death through mass increase of sanctions!? Puhhleaseee! It'll look just like NKorea today, just under a new, weaker State. (not good at all!)

Say that a true workers revolution takes place in North and South Korea. Say the workers from countries around the now-unified Korea also undergo a revolution, and well you can guess the rest.
Of course let's not be naive to think that all this will happen easily, but this is somewhat the idea of a working-class revolution, not a "revolution" to put a individual, small group or a party in power.

You're right.
The working class of only one country just can not sustain the revolution.

[Rooster]

Supposedly. The Iranian scientist kidnapped to the US stated a lot of bullshit too. I don't think it holds much credibility. It's still out of pure assumption. It also contradicts that of the experts on the Korean region, such as those of Cumings and Beal.

Okay, get Cumings' book, and try to find the sources he mentions then get back to us. See who contradicts who.

[Demogorgon]

And what exactly did you expect when a country is asking for 20% of its agriculture to be helped acquired through foreign aid, yet cannot receive such due to mass increase of sanctions? This isn't the DPRK's fault. Unless you're going to come up with some odd idea that the DPRK designed the country by hand and deliberately made it to where they're not able to build up enough agriculture to adequately feed their people properly!

Oh wait...I already pointed that out earlier in the thread. Amazing what happens when someone refuses or just completely disregards what we present. It's like they don't care and just go off to find whatever article they can find to throw dirt on the DPRK...nahhhh..that can't be it. :rolleyes:

Given North Korea has specifically stated that its goal is autarky sanctions should have little effect. A country that wants to import and export as little as possible will have a lot of problems but being vulnerable to sanctions is not one of them. I know that it is difficult to come up with convincing arguments when deep down you don't believe them, but surely you can do better than that?


She was talking about the DPRK during the '90s. You know, when starvation was actually real in the DPRK! And yeah, a lot of mistakes were made and some terrible shit could've happened. But does that put into account the present conditions taking place? Or should we dig up terrible shit everywhere and then say "overthrow them because of their past!"?
Even if there are no longer food shortages, which is somewhat doubtful, the Government that presided over the famine is still in office and ought to be held to account for it. Of course this leads us to another problem, namely that Governments cannot win reelection after being seen to cope with a disaster badly, so why are they still in office when you claim the country is a vibrant Democracy? Surely they would have been defeated at the next election?

Even suppose they were able to convince people to re-elect them they must have faced quite a tough campaign. Can you tell me how many people voted for an alternative Government in the last few elections?

[Demogorgon]

4. Downsizing the military? :laugh: Their military is a fucking pipsqueak compared to the US's and SKorea's military! Why the fuck would they downsize it when they're being threatened by the imperialists? Are you fucking stupid?

If the military is "pipsqueak" then why is it a good deterrent to the "imperialists"?

Funnily enough in a round about way the military policy almost certainly has reduced the chance of North Korea being invaded. All the resources wasted on the military has left the country economically ruined and of little value. You use the word "imperialist" like it signifies cartoon villains who attack countries because they like their evil plots, but the actual reason these invasions happen is for profit. When there is none to be made they are unlikely to attack.

If you actually pay attention you will see that the South Korean government is attempting to curb the public's desire and expectation of reunification, because despite being officially committed to it, the actual fact is that it would bankrupt South Korea to attempt to incorporate the North.

Since the mid-nineties at least South Korean and American policy has clearly been one of containment, there is no money to be made in bringing down the North Korean Government at this stage so they would rather just isolate it.

Which brings us back to the North's ridiculous focus on the military. Now here is a mad notion, could it be that a Government that has "Military first" as its ideology might just be relying on the military as its base of power? Nah, that would be far too obvious.

[Marxach-Léinínach]

Even if there are no longer food shortages, which is somewhat doubtful, the Government that presided over the famine is still in office and ought to be held to account for it.
So wait, you're seriously saying that the WPK should actually be punished for the fact that natural disasters happened?

[Demogorgon]

So wait, you're seriously saying that the WPK should actually be punished for the fact that natural disasters happened?
Well in the first instance a key role of Government is to cope with natural disasters, something this one failed to do, secondly-and here is the really important bit-Governments always lose popularity during national disasters unless they cope with them really well. Given the Government in question will have lost popularity there will obviously at least be evidence somewhere of hard fought elections, alternative candidates and the number of votes they obtained and so forth. I await them eagerly.

[Dimentio]

And Socialist Albania was a shining example of political liberty? :rolleyes:

(Not that given the circumstances the limitations that it had on political liberty were not born in the majiority of cases by dire necesscity....But still, pot, kettle, black!).

Hoxha was a competent leader and Albania did only start to have real economic problems in the 90's. It was poor, but people weren't exactly starving.

North Korea is a few degrees worse.

[Rooster]

Hoxha was a competent leader and Albania did only start to have real economic problems in the 90's. It was poor, but people weren't exactly starving.

North Korea is a few degrees worse.

Why was Albania having problems in the 90s? What kind of problems?

[Dimentio]

Typical problems which you get when you suddenly are opening up an almost completely sealed economy.

Albania was a poor country, yes. It was not half that bad as North Korea.

[psgchisolm]

1. SKorea didn't have to fire artillery first on NKorean shores, as according to international law.
2. They never fired a torpedo, nor sunk the SKorean Cheonan. The experts agree that NKorea was not involved whatsoever.
3. They have gone to the diplomatic tables and asked for peace, if you ever read something called...get this...the news! The US have refused to participate through 6 way talks, which the DPRK have agreed upon.
4. Downsizing the military? :laugh: Their military is a fucking pipsqueak compared to the US's and SKorea's military! Why the fuck would they downsize it when they're being threatened by the imperialists? Are you fucking stupid?
5. Because, even the WHO (World Health Organization) denies these charges. The furthest they've gone is state that there's malnutrition present. On the other hand, those who've never stepped a single foot on the DPRK have stated otherwise, crying starvation. :rolleyes:
I was wrong when I stated a torpedo had attacked them. It was this
http://www.armedforces-int.com/news/korean_navies_skirmish_in_disputed_waters.html

These contradicting statements certianly don't help
http://www.rferl.org/content/North_Korea_Threatens_Nuclear_Sacred_War_If_Attack ed/2140545.html

Their military is 1,106,000 active ROK's is 687,000 and 28,000 american forces are deployed there. With American forces deployed all across the world, also refer to demogorgon.

http://www.who.int/nha/use/the_pc_2007.png

From the WFP on nutrition http://www.wfp.org/countries/korea-democratic-peoples-republic-dprk

U.N. On DPRK testing of Nuclear bomb in '09 http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/afp_asiapacific/view/431821/1/.html
After they agreed to this
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/world/5186801.html
They certainly haven't showed any commitment to making peace,especially after signing reconciliation pacts only to violate them years later. They now want peace talks, the U.S. wants to see them show commitment, don't you think thats reasonable?

[PilesOfDeadNazis]

Of course let's not be naive to think that all this will happen easily, but this is somewhat the idea of a working-class revolution, not a "revolution" to put a individual, small group or a party in power.
Idealism is fun.

[Demogorgon]

We were told that there was no death penalty
Here the report's credibility is shot to pieces. The North Korean Government acknowledges that it practices the death penalty and occasionally reports of individual executions when it feels them noteworthy, the execution of the scapegoat for failed currency reform being the most recent case I am aware of. If the report is going to make such an elementary error then it is clearly not at all well researched and is of little value.

[manic expression]

Well in the first instance a key role of Government is to cope with natural disasters, something this one failed to do, secondly-and here is the really important bit-Governments always lose popularity during national disasters unless they cope with them really well. Given the Government in question will have lost popularity there will obviously at least be evidence somewhere of hard fought elections, alternative candidates and the number of votes they obtained and so forth. I await them eagerly.
You're dodging the issue. When the DPRK's capacity for coping with natural disasters was severely undercut by a lack of solidarity on the world stage and other challenges not of its making, you can hardly blame the KWP for doing everything it could in its power to protect the well-being of its class.

If you don't know anything about the economic realities of the DPRK, then disasters such as floods and resulting famine would be something you would think that a government should just magically "cope with". If, in contrast, you do know that 90% of the DPRK is mountainous and therefore unsuitable for farming (http://www.agnet.org/library/eb/475/), that the floods heavily damaged crucial produce output and that the DPRK was besieged by imperialism some years prior...then it becomes quite a different thing.

As for other parties, look up the Chondoist Chongu Party and the Korean Social Democratic Party.


If the military is "pipsqueak" then why is it a good deterrent to the "imperialists"?
Because it makes the cost of an invasion high enough to make the imperialists think twice. The US spends as much or more on military expenditures than the rest of the world combined...everyone is going to be "pipsqueak" when facing that death machine. However, the DPRK's focus on military buildup is wise, and this was confirmed in all manner during last year's imperialist provocations. Had the KWP not followed this route, it is quite easy to imagine imperialist flags flying over Pyongyang this very minute. Though no doubt you probably wouldn't care.

[Demogorgon]

That's a great zinger. It would be even better if the DPRK hadn't reinstated the death penalty in October 2007 after abolishing it in 2000, meaning that a delegation from a prestigious legal organization in 2003 would have been correct in writing that North Korea did not practice capital punishment at the time.
Or not. What the State practiced less (though not ceased entirely) was public executions. It continued to practice them in private behind prison walls.

[Demogorgon]

You're dodging the issue. When the DPRK's capacity for coping with natural disasters was severely undercut by a lack of solidarity on the world stage and other challenges not of its making, you can hardly blame the KWP for doing everything it could in its power to protect the well-being of its class.

If you don't know anything about the economic realities of the DPRK, then disasters such as floods and resulting famine would be something you would think that a government should just magically "cope with". If, in contrast, you do know that 90% of the DPRK is mountainous and therefore unsuitable for farming (http://www.agnet.org/library/eb/475/), that the floods heavily damaged crucial produce output and that the DPRK was besieged by imperialism some years prior...then it becomes quite a different thing.But hang on, the North Korean Government is a glorious socialist nation that presumably has at least reasonable development. All developed nations cope readily with food shortages. They just buy food from abroad. You might say North Korea is hit with sanctions, but the sanctions should not have prevented the purchase of food from China. What prevented it was the Government pursuing its "self reliance" and failing to build decent trade links with China.

Few if any countries can produce all their own food. Apart from anything else it is difficult to achieve sufficient diversity in foodstuffs. Almost all countries including heavily sanction hit ones import food. This is because North Korea is pretty much unique in refusing to build proper trade links with other countries.

Unless you seriously want to tell me that North Korea does not have such a policy?

Besides my central point is that in an even moderately open society there would have been widespread public anger at the famine even if the Government should not have been blamed. Public opinion always targets the Government at these times regardless of where the blame really should go, so where is the evidence that the Government had any tough election campaigns on its hands?

We are told that North Korea is a thriving Democracy, we also know that the Government has been in power right since the beginning. The only way that we can reconcile these two facts is if the public genuinely believe that they are the best possible Government. Yet such a perception would by necessity take a hit during a famine. At the very least the opposition would claim it could do better, and regardless of the merits of that people would at least consider that and some would believe it. Public opinion is never unanimous after all. So where is the evidence of all this?


As for other parties, look up the Chondoist Chongu Party and the Korean Social Democratic Party.Oh come on, you mean the parties that acknowledge the Worker's Party as their leader and do not run candidates against it instead being given certain seats to run in? They are to the Worker's Party what the Cooperative Party in the UK is to the Labour Party.

But if you want to prove me wrong, it would be very easy to do. All you would have to do would be to post the average number of candidates per district in the last few elections (or even just one election if it is too much effort to look up several). If you don't want to do that you could simply give an example of the Government losing a vote it was keen to win, tell me how many dissenting voices there usually are in votes of any type, give an example of a public movement against a particular policy. With so many possibilities I am sure you can come up with something.


Because it makes the cost of an invasion high enough to make the imperialists think twice. The US spends as much or more on military expenditures than the rest of the world combined...everyone is going to be "pipsqueak" when facing that death machine. However, the DPRK's focus on military buildup is wise, and this was confirmed in all manner during last year's imperialist provocations. Had the KWP not followed this route, it is quite easy to imagine imperialist flags flying over Pyongyang this very minute. Though no doubt you probably wouldn't care.
I see, so what would make invasion too expensive would not be the fact that attempting to integrate North Korea would bankrupt South Korea? Come on, why exactly would there be any advantage in invading North Korea? Imperialism is Machiavellian in nature, it seeks benefit to itself, there would be nothing to be gained from an invasion and much to lose. That is why the policy since the mid nineties (at least) has been containment.

So tell me, given the desire to strengthen their position why would America and South Korea do something that would so blatantly hurt them?

[Cane Nero]

Idealism is fun.
You know what's funny?
People who condemns churches and religions to alienate the people but, although, believe blindly in some messiah who say that want to bring communism, the freedom of workers, by dictatorial ways and creates numerous privileges for the great Messiah and his apostles saviors of the poor sheeps, the workers.

[Demogorgon]

Can you cite any instance of confirmed capital punishment from 2000 to 2004 in North Korea that didn't originate with a specious South Korean source?
There's a suspicious narrowing, first of all you tell us that it wasn't in existence until 2007 and then you ask for up to 2004.

Anyway to use the original claim we have the Amnesty report from 2005: http://www.amnesty.org.uk/news_details.asp?NewsID=17030

Amnesty states the number of executions in 2005 was "1+" meaning that it has positively verified one execution and has evidence that other executions were carried out but cannot verify the identities. Even if you disregard the mere possibility of the unverified executions that leaves at least one definite execution during the period you said there was no Death Penalty. Oops...

[KC]

There is no such thing as a natural disaster. Mass famine happens only when the impotencies of government allow it to. There are several very obvious and very simple steps that a government can take to remedy such a situation, none of which were taken by the DPRK government, regardless of sanctions.


The US spends as much or more on military expenditures than the rest of the world combined...

The US spends 4.3% of GDP on military expenditures as of 2008. The DPRK is estimated to spend 25% of GDP on military expenditures, which is the significant figure here.


So tell me, given the desire to strengthen their position why would America and South Korea do something that would so blatantly hurt them?

One should ask Manic if he considers China to be imperialist, with regards to this situation. :rolleyes:

[PilesOfDeadNazis]

You know what's funny?
People who condemns churches and religions to alienate the people but, although, believe blindly in some messiah who say that want to bring communism, the freedom of workers, by dictatorial ways and creates numerous privileges for the great Messiah and his apostles saviors of the poor sheeps, the workers.
You admit it's naive to believe a sponaneous revolution of workers will happen in both the states of Korea. Do you think we should wait and just let Imperialism do what it wants(put the people of all countries in a chokehold) until this simultaneous awakening happens?

[manic expression]

But hang on, the North Korean Government is a glorious socialist nation that presumably has at least reasonable development. All developed nations cope readily with food shortages. They just buy food from abroad. You might say North Korea is hit with sanctions, but the sanctions should not have prevented the purchase of food from China. What prevented it was the Government pursuing its "self reliance" and failing to build decent trade links with China.

Few if any countries can produce all their own food. Apart from anything else it is difficult to achieve sufficient diversity in foodstuffs. Almost all countries including heavily sanction hit ones import food. This is because North Korea is pretty much unique in refusing to build proper trade links with other countries.
That's silly. The situation that the DPRK finds itself in is a relatively recent development, starting with the fall of the Soviet Union. Before that point, the DPRK did have reasonable trade links with other countries. Therefore, it is quite easy to conclude that the problem lies not with the DPRK but with developments outside of its control. Your own logic leads us here, unless you'd like to posit that it was some coincidence that these issues came to the fore most strongly in the early 90's in the aftermath of the fall of European socialism.


Besides my central point is that in an even moderately open society there would have been widespread public anger at the famine even if the Government should not have been blamed. Public opinion always targets the Government at these times
You only hold to that position because you are basing your analysis on bourgeois societies and not working-class states. In socialist societies, workers understand that even if the party does everything it can to promote their class' well-being, imperialist aggression takes its toll. The Korean workers of the DPRK know what the imperialists did to their friends and families during the Korean War, and the siege on the DPRK is just another extension of that. To blame the DPRK and the KWP would therefore be aiding imperialism.


We are told that North Korea is a thriving Democracy, we also know that the Government has been in power right since the beginning. The only way that we can reconcile these two facts is if the public genuinely believe that they are the best possible Government. Yet such a perception would by necessity take a hit during a famine.
That is nothing but a leap in logic. Trying to figure out what is "the best" is a fool's errand; correctly identifying the DPRK as a working-class government is more important. That fact is once again driven home through the DPRK's performance under the most trying of circumstances. The people of the DPRK know that when disasters happen in capitalist countries, the government plays guitar and eats cake; when they happen in their country, the government does everything in its power to help the working classes. No reconciliation is necessary, as one fact follows from another.


Oh come on, you mean the parties that acknowledge the Worker's Party as their leader and do not run candidates against it instead being given certain seats to run in? They are to the Worker's Party what the Cooperative Party in the UK is to the Labour Party.
So I take it you don't accept the existence of non-KWP parties if you don't agree with their platforms. Perhaps you know best, perhaps Koreans should kow-tow to your judgment.


But if you want to prove me wrong, it would be very easy to do. All you would have to do would be to post the average number of candidates per district in the last few elections (or even just one election if it is too much effort to look up several).
http://www1.korea-np.co.jp/pk/195th_issue/2003081602.htm

But your stance tells us that you're basing your standards of democracy on bourgeois standards. Elections can be fully democratic with only one candidate per district...Cuba has proven as much. But according to you, more candidates make more democracy. So I take it you support your own country's electoral system, then?


I see, so what would make invasion too expensive would not be the fact that attempting to integrate North Korea would bankrupt South Korea? Come on, why exactly would there be any advantage in invading North Korea? Imperialism is Machiavellian in nature, it seeks benefit to itself, there would be nothing to be gained from an invasion and much to lose. That is why the policy since the mid nineties (at least) has been containment.

So tell me, given the desire to strengthen their position why would America and South Korea do something that would so blatantly hurt them?
To the contrary, suppression (what you term "integration") of the north is beneficial to the imperialists. Under present circumstances, the economies would in all likelihood not be unified in the immediate aftermath of an invasion. Instead, a military occupation of the north would be carried out, probably with an emphasis on "peacekeeping" on the borders with China and Russia. Only after the imperialists had started (through shock therapy, inevitably) the beginnings of a privatized capitalist economy would economic unification be a possibility.

The imperialists would not only gain full control of the Korean penninsula, not only the long-term prospect of a stronger trading protectorate in a fully occupied and conquered Korea, but also the removal of one of the last socialist states left on the planet.

But like I said, if the imperialists invaded and suppressed the DPRK tomorrow, I doubt you'd care.


There is no such thing as a natural disaster. Mass famine happens only when the impotencies of government allow it to. There are several very obvious and very simple steps that a government can take to remedy such a situation, none of which were taken by the DPRK government, regardless of sanctions.
Mass famine also happens during investment, which is essentially what the people of the DPRK face. But by all means, agricultural expert, do illustrate how one could magically make the DPRK less mountainous and more suitable for farming?


The US spends 4.3% of GDP on military expenditures as of 2008. The DPRK is estimated to spend 25% of GDP on military expenditures, which is the significant figure here.
Wrong. The passage in question is, Their military is a fucking pipsqueak compared to the US's and SKorea's military! Which means the comparison that means something is the comparison between the absolute power of the US and RoK against the DPRK. Bearing that in mind, the DPRK can only count on itself for defense against the imperialist death machine, and so it is certainly a reasonable course of action to dedicate a great deal of effort into building up its military.


One should ask Manic if he considers China to be imperialist, with regards to this situation.
Ah, the old tangent routine. If you're just dying to know, I do not consider the PRC to be imperialist...imperialist-friendly at times, sure, but there's a difference. I await your promised prodigious agricultural expertise.

[Cane Nero]

You admit it's naive to believe a sponaneous revolution of workers will happen in both the states of Korea.

NO, I admit that a working-class revolution made by the workers themselves is extremely difficult but not impossible. It would need lots of planning and organization, and it´s not something that will start one day and finish in the other.




Do you think we should wait and just let Imperialism do what it wants(put the people of all countries in a chokehold) until this simultaneous awakening happens?

I think we should not support, nor have the idea of creating a state where it seeks to compete with the capitalist imperialists.
To compete with a capitalist economy, there is the need to exploit workers like them.

[PilesOfDeadNazis]

NO, I admit that a working-class revolution made by the workers themselves is extremely difficult but not impossible. It would need lots of planning and organization, and it´s not something that will start one day and finish in the other.




I think we should not support, nor have the idea of creating a state where it seeks to compete with the capitalist imperialists.
To compete with a capitalist economy, there is the need to exploit workers like them.
Are you saying North Korea is trying to be just as Imperialist as the Big Imperialists? When they have never invaded another nation or expressed wishes to do so and make it a point to try to keep their heads above water WITHOUT working with the Imperialists?

[Demogorgon]

First off, I acknowledge that you have painted yourself into am corner here and are making these arguments more out of not wanting to back down rather than actually believing them, but you should know that posting these absurdities is making you look silly.
That's silly. The situation that the DPRK finds itself in is a relatively recent development, starting with the fall of the Soviet Union. Before that point, the DPRK did have reasonable trade links with other countries. Therefore, it is quite easy to conclude that the problem lies not with the DPRK but with developments outside of its control. Your own logic leads us here, unless you'd like to posit that it was some coincidence that these issues came to the fore most strongly in the early 90's in the aftermath of the fall of European socialism.
Given it barely traded with those countries, or received aid from them, it is hard to see how it would have a significant effect. China, which was the only power that North Korea had any economic links worth speaking of remained.

Saying that the problem did not lie within the country is utterly ridiculous. The problem was agricultural mismanagement in the first instance but the reason there was a famine (as opposed simply to inefficient farms) was failure to import food. Unless you can think of a good reason for a competent Government not to import food to cover for a shortage you are going to find your line of argument going nowhere.


You only hold to that position because you are basing your analysis on bourgeois societies and not working-class states. In socialist societies, workers understand that even if the party does everything it can to promote their class' well-being, imperialist aggression takes its toll. The Korean workers of the DPRK know what the imperialists did to their friends and families during the Korean War, and the siege on the DPRK is just another extension of that. To blame the DPRK and the KWP would therefore be aiding imperialism.You are telling me that North Koreans are not capable of questioning whether the Government really is acting in their interests? Frankly that reeks of racism.

Anyway what exactly would the Government have to do for you to consider it to have stopped acting in the interests of the workers?


That is nothing but a leap in logic. Trying to figure out what is "the best" is a fool's errand; correctly identifying the DPRK as a working-class government is more important. That fact is once again driven home through the DPRK's performance under the most trying of circumstances. The people of the DPRK know that when disasters happen in capitalist countries, the government plays guitar and eats cake; when they happen in their country, the government does everything in its power to help the working classes. No reconciliation is necessary, as one fact follows from another.
I actually laughed to read that, I wonder if this post is really meant to be read as a parody. Given the North Korean Government utterly failed to cope with the famine while many other countries have succeeded (by importing food) it is something of a stretch to saythat the Government did everything in its power.


So I take it you don't accept the existence of non-KWP parties if you don't agree with their platforms. Perhaps you know best, perhaps Koreans should kow-tow to your judgment.
No, I don't accept parties that do not compete with the Governing party, nor challenge it on any policy and in fact are run by it as being independent parties.


http://www1.korea-np.co.jp/pk/195th_issue/2003081602.htm

Oh come on! This link tells us that on 99.9% turnout 100% of people voted for the Government! Don't you find that a tiny bit suspicious? 100% votes in an election where millions of people take part is simply not possible, there are always mavericks that think differently.

Further given you have just told us that there are other parties then surely [/i]someone[/i] voted for them, if only their leaders, yet that link tells us 100% of people voted yes.

Also at least some dissidents leave North Korea, even if they are a tiny minority whose views in no way reflect those within the country, then at the very least surely the ones who had yet to leave would have voted against the Government.


But your stance tells us that you're basing your standards of democracy on bourgeois standards. Elections can be fully democratic with only one candidate per district...Cuba has proven as much. But according to you, more candidates make more democracy. So I take it you support your own country's electoral system, then?
How can an election where you can only vote one way possibly be democratic?

Anyway surely worker's democracy should be held to higher standards than bourgeoisie democracy? The reason I am asking for only the lowest possible evidence of some kind of political competition is that I am trying to make it as easy as possible for you to prove me wrong. If I wanted to make things difficult for you, I would ask for proof that North Korea was far more democratic than any Western State, but I am not, I am looking for the most minimal standards I can possibly define, not because I think they are the acceptable standards of democracy, but because I want to make things as easy as possible for you. Yet you still can't come up with even the most minor example?

And no I don't support the electoral system here, but I find it telling that North Korea doesn't come even vaguely close to that.


To the contrary, suppression (what you term "integration") of the north is beneficial to the imperialists. Under present circumstances, the economies would in all likelihood not be unified in the immediate aftermath of an invasion. Instead, a military occupation of the north would be carried out, probably with an emphasis on "peacekeeping" on the borders with China and Russia. Only after the imperialists had started (through shock therapy, inevitably) the beginnings of a privatized capitalist economy would economic unification be a possibility.

The imperialists would not only gain full control of the Korean penninsula, not only the long-term prospect of a stronger trading protectorate in a fully occupied and conquered Korea, but also the removal of one of the last socialist states left on the planet.

But like I said, if the imperialists invaded and suppressed the DPRK tomorrow, I doubt you'd care.This all sounds mighty unlikely to me. Exactly how would a United Korea be a stronger "trading protectorate"? What is the strategic value in all of the Korean peninsula? Exactly how would they maintain a nominally independent North Korea without at least requiring huge input from South Korea? Imperialism isn't about being a cartoon supervillain, it is about seeking advantage, not embarking on an adventure ruinous to those taking part.



Wrong. The passage in question is, Their military is a fucking pipsqueak compared to the US's and SKorea's military! Which means the comparison that means something is the comparison between the absolute power of the US and RoK against the DPRK. Bearing that in mind, the DPRK can only count on itself for defense against the imperialist death machine, and so it is certainly a reasonable course of action to dedicate a great deal of effort into building up its military.

Do you honestly deny that it has anything to do with the military being the Government's power base? maybe your right, it could just be utter coincidence that at the same time as the Government removed some of the last remaining references to socialism in the Constitution it also proclaimed "Military First" as the state ideology.

Again though, I am aware that this ridiculous post is because you have dug yourself a hole and don't want to lose face by backing down. I am well aware that you don't really believe this and are trying to convince yourself of what you write in order to deal with the cognitive dissonance that comes from both holding nominally progressive politics and defending the North Korean state. I know because I have painted myself in that particular corner in the past defending the indefencible, nut perhaps it is time to actually admit you are fooling yourself?

[manic expression]

Given it barely traded with those countries, or received aid from them, it is hard to see how it would have a significant effect. China, which was the only power that North Korea had any economic links worth speaking of remained.
You need to do some homework. The DPRK traded plenty with the USSR.

During 197295 the DPRK imported transport equipment valued at an estimated $2 billion (in nominal dollars, at current official exchange rates). More than half of these imports originated in the former Soviet Bloc territories (48 percent in U.S.S.R./Russia, 7 percent in countries of Central Asia, as well as Central and Eastern Europe). Roughly 40 percent came from OECD countries (29 percent from Japan, 10 percent from Germany and other OECD members). The remainder—just 6 percent —was shipped from China or from developing countries.
http://www.worldbank.org/html/prddr/trans/marapr98/pgs21-23.htm

More than half of the DPRK's trade went through governments that, by the early 90's, didn't exist anymore...and you're blaming the DPRK.


Saying that the problem did not lie within the country is utterly ridiculous. The problem was agricultural mismanagement in the first instance but the reason there was a famine (as opposed simply to inefficient farms) was failure to import food. Unless you can think of a good reason for a competent Government not to import food to cover for a shortage you are going to find your line of argument going nowhere.
The "failure to import food" was due to the fact that the DPRK wasn't able to. In the absence of trade partners, an absence created not by the DPRK but by the fall of European socialism, the KWP did everything they could to respond to the crisis, and that is why the DPRK was able to recover eventually.


You are telling me that North Koreans are not capable of questioning whether the Government really is acting in their interests? Frankly that reeks of racism.
You're smelling your own desperation. Remember, you're the one trying to tell me North Koreans are too dumb to plant crops in the ground.


Anyway what exactly would the Government have to do for you to consider it to have stopped acting in the interests of the workers?
Wear white after Labor Day. Eat dessert before dinner. Bet on baseball.


I actually laughed to read that, I wonder if this post is really meant to be read as a parody. Given the North Korean Government utterly failed to cope with the famine while many other countries have succeeded (by importing food) it is something of a stretch to saythat the Government did everything in its power.
The DPRK did cope with the famine, but it took time and a herculean effort on the part of the workers. That's because they were besieged by imperialism. Laughing at such self-sacrifice is fitting to your position.

Oh, and "other countries" aren't facing investment. The DPRK can't create trading partners by clicking their heels together three times, especially when the imperialists smelled blood and wanted to give up no concessions.


No, I don't accept parties that do not compete with the Governing party, nor challenge it on any policy and in fact are run by it as being independent parties.
As I thought, you only accept parties you agree with.


Oh come on! This link tells us that on 99.9% turnout 100% of people voted for the Government! Don't you find that a tiny bit suspicious? 100% votes in an election where millions of people take part is simply not possible, there are always mavericks that think differently.
That's because the candidates were already nominated through a prior process. That's how the system works. By the time elections are carried out, debate has already been aired and completed for that cycle.


Further given you have just told us that there are other parties then surely [/i]someone[/i] voted for them, if only their leaders, yet that link tells us 100% of people voted yes.
Candidates from those non-KWP parties were included in that 100% figure.


Also at least some dissidents leave North Korea, even if they are a tiny minority whose views in no way reflect those within the country, then at the very least surely the ones who had yet to leave would have voted against the Government.
Such voices would have inevitably failed to achieve nomination. Further, we should not forget that the DPRK is in a state of war against imperialism. It is hardly surprising that pro-imperialist voices would find little currency.


How can an election where you can only vote one way possibly be democratic?
Again, it's a question of how candidates are nominated. Cuba's system sees this similarity, as by election time there is one candidate per constituency, but those candidates have already gone through an extensive nomination process in open, public meetings. The election itself is mostly a confirmation of the nomination, and so the nomination becomes the real "election" (which means more local decision-making instead of big campaigns).


Anyway surely worker's democracy should be held to higher standards than bourgeoisie democracy? The reason I am asking for only the lowest possible evidence of some kind of political competition is that I am trying to make it as easy as possible for you to prove me wrong. If I wanted to make things difficult for you, I would ask for proof that North Korea was far more democratic than any Western State, but I am not, I am looking for the most minimal standards I can possibly define, not because I think they are the acceptable standards of democracy, but because I want to make things as easy as possible for you. Yet you still can't come up with even the most minor example?
The reason we run into difficulty is precisely because of this contradiction. To judge socialist democracy on bourgeois standards (to achieve "lowest possible evidence") is like asking to find an equivalency in economic growth patterns...they don't really match up at all.


And no I don't support the electoral system here, but I find it telling that North Korea doesn't come even vaguely close to that.
No, it's not at all close, as it should be.


This all sounds mighty unlikely to me. Exactly how would a United Korea be a stronger "trading protectorate"?
Bigger population = more workers
A population under military occupation = no union problems = less wages across the board
No major national security issues for the forseeable future = less taxes = more money for capitalists
Two new land borders with major powers for capitalist Korea = more trade
Acquired industry of the DPRK = more production


What is the strategic value in all of the Korean peninsula?
It borders the PRC and Russia. It would negate any threat to imperialists interests from the DPRK.


Exactly how would they maintain a nominally independent North Korea without at least requiring huge input from South Korea? Imperialism isn't about being a cartoon supervillain, it is about seeking advantage, not embarking on an adventure ruinous to those taking part.
They wouldn't maintain a nominally independent North Korea, they would put it under military occupation and declare martial law, which is the opposite of independence.


Do you honestly deny that it has anything to do with the military being the Government's power base? maybe your right, it could just be utter coincidence that at the same time as the Government removed some of the last remaining references to socialism in the Constitution it also proclaimed "Military First" as the state ideology.
The "Military First" policy is the only reason Abrams tanks aren't rumbling through Pyongyang this very minute. I think that has everything to do with the prudent policies of the KWP on this matter.


Again though, I am aware that this ridiculous post is because you have dug yourself a hole and don't want to lose face by backing down.
Yes, I would hate to "lose face"...how very Oriental of me. :rolleyes:

[Demogorgon]

You need to do some homework. The DPRK traded plenty with the USSR.

During 197295 the DPRK imported transport equipment valued at an estimated $2 billion (in nominal dollars, at current official exchange rates). More than half of these imports originated in the former Soviet Bloc territories (48 percent in U.S.S.R./Russia, 7 percent in countries of Central Asia, as well as Central and Eastern Europe). Roughly 40 percent came from OECD countries (29 percent from Japan, 10 percent from Germany and other OECD members). The remainder—just 6 percent —was shipped from China or from developing countries.
http://www.worldbank.org/html/prddr/trans/marapr98/pgs21-23.htm

More than half of the DPRK's trade went through governments that, by the early 90's, didn't exist anymore...and you're blaming the DPRK.That's a figure from 1972 isn't it? Before North Korea broke with the Soviet Union. But really are you telling me that North Korea's lack of trade is through no choice of its own. Is Juche just another imperialist lie?


The "failure to import food" was due to the fact that the DPRK wasn't able to. In the absence of trade partners, an absence created not by the DPRK but by the fall of European socialism, the KWP did everything they could to respond to the crisis, and that is why the DPRK was able to recover eventually.
Really who was refusing to sell food to North Korea and did it include China? The famine has its roots in autarky.


You're smelling your own desperation. Remember, you're the one trying to tell me North Koreans are too dumb to plant crops in the ground.Given that it is not me posting things I know to be false in order to avoid admitting that I am wrong, it is a bit rich to call me the desperate one. Once again, do you think Koreans are somehow incapable of thinking for themselves?


Wear white after Labor Day. Eat dessert before dinner. Bet on baseball.
Nothing in other words. You have committed yourself to support of North Korea no matter what the character of the Government. That is telling.


The DPRK did cope with the famine, but it took time and a herculean effort on the part of the workers. That's because they were besieged by imperialism. Laughing at such self-sacrifice is fitting to your position.Since when was I laughing at anyone besides you? The Government failed to cope with the famine and I think it is a pretty safe bet that the people in North Korea know it. You know it too, but you are trying to tell yourself otherwise.


Oh, and "other countries" aren't facing investment. The DPRK can't create trading partners by clicking their heels together three times, especially when the imperialists smelled blood and wanted to give up no concessions.
What do you mean by "facing investment" anyway? Besides North Korea has no trouble trading when it wants to. When it offered limited opportunities to South Korea and China to invest they fell over themselves to take it. With China alone it could carry out all the trade it wanted and China is certainly not refusing to trade, so you can hardly say it is pursuing autarky out of choice.


As I thought, you only accept parties you agree with.
No and I grow weary of you playing the fool. I said nothing about whether I agreed with their policies, only if they were independent of the Worker's party, which they are not. Now if you can name any independent party there, any at all, I am sure your case would be better.


That's because the candidates were already nominated through a prior process. That's how the system works. By the time elections are carried out, debate has already been aired and completed for that cycle.
I see. No doubt then you will be able to show us evidence of a vibrant and competitive nomination process?

That being said, if the process was already concluded, why did 99.9% of voters turn out to vote? If the process was done and dusted, why bother?


Such voices would have inevitably failed to achieve nomination. Further, we should not forget that the DPRK is in a state of war against imperialism. It is hardly surprising that pro-imperialist voices would find little currency.
They would obtain some support though. Yet you are claiming they achieved none, not even from themselves.


Again, it's a question of how candidates are nominated. Cuba's system sees this similarity, as by election time there is one candidate per constituency, but those candidates have already gone through an extensive nomination process in open, public meetings. The election itself is mostly a confirmation of the nomination, and so the nomination becomes the real "election" (which means more local decision-making instead of big campaigns).
Again I look forward to being shown the vibrant and competitive nomination process in North Korea. I am sure you are going to provide me with evidence of it.


The reason we run into difficulty is precisely because of this contradiction. To judge socialist democracy on bourgeois standards (to achieve "lowest possible evidence") is like asking to find an equivalency in economic growth patterns...they don't really match up at all.I see, so socialist democracy doesn't include such things as competition, disagreements over policy, people voting different ways? I am not sure I share that assessment. Socialism is supposed to be more democratic than capitalism, not next.

But okay, I will be even more generous to you and let you give the easiest possible example to find I can think of. Show me a single grassroots or independent campaign in North Korea that persuaded the Government to change a policy.


No, it's not at all close, as it should be.
No it should be better, yet it is far worse.


Bigger population = more workers
A population under military occupation = no union problems = less wages across the board
No major national security issues for the forseeable future = less taxes = more money for capitalists
Two new land borders with major powers for capitalist Korea = more trade
Acquired industry of the DPRK = more production

It borders the PRC and Russia. It would negate any threat to imperialists interests from the DPRK.You make some rather strange assumptions, but even leaving that aside you seem to be leaving out the huge cost of reconstructing North Korea.


They wouldn't maintain a nominally independent North Korea, they would put it under military occupation and declare martial law, which is the opposite of independence.
That's an excellent theory, the only snag being that it would be politically impossible. Any South Korean Government that attempted that would lose the next election and consign their party to the opposition for a generation. War with North Korea would be very unpopular in South Korea and doing something like that to it afterwards would be hated. Now you will no doubt come back by saying that South Korea isn't a democracy and public opinion can de disregarded, but that is a childish misunderstanding of how capitalist polyarchy works. Different politicians appeal for popularity to try and get into office and nobody is going to attach themselves to such a deeply unpopular policy when it would certainly have them loose the next election.


The "Military First" policy is the only reason Abrams tanks aren't rumbling through Pyongyang this very minute. I think that has everything to do with the prudent policies of the KWP on this matter.
I see, even disregarding your paranoid conceptions of the likelihood of invasions, you don't see any problem with the military being the centre of political power in the country?


Yes, I would hate to "lose face"...how very Oriental of me. :rolleyes:Well whatever it is, there has to be some reason you are talking such rubbish, is it just an attempt to deal with the cognitive dissonance your position brings?

[Cane Nero]

Are you saying North Korea is trying to be just as Imperialist as the Big Imperialists? When they have never invaded another nation or expressed wishes to do so and make it a point to try to keep their heads above water WITHOUT working with the Imperialists?
The NKorea wants to join the two Koreas into a "socialist" government?
But anyway I said that Korea wants to compete with the capitalists, and not necessarily invade other countries.
I'm saying we should not compete with capitalism, we must destroy it.

[manic expression]

That's a figure from 1972 isn't it? Before North Korea broke with the Soviet Union. But really are you telling me that North Korea's lack of trade is through no choice of its own. Is Juche just another imperialist lie?
Wrong. That was before the height of USSR-DPRK trade, which was reached in 1988:

That said, economic pressures on the DPRK are indeed mounting. After peaking at about $5.2 billion in 1988, North Korean trade has contracted by over 50 percent to about US$ 2.1 billion in 1994.

http://oldsite.nautilus.org/DPRKBriefingBook/economy/DPRKEconomicLinkages.html

Gee, I wonder what happened between 1988 and 1994.


Really who was refusing to sell food to North Korea and did it include China? The famine has its roots in autarky.
Ah, so your new argument is that there's a huge American-EU-Japanese Bazaar on the DMV, just waiting to do unlimited business with the DPRK. Good one. :lol:


The same kind of pressure, applied unilaterally by the U.S., is likely to be even less effective against North Korea, because trade between the two countries is already severely restricted. Last year, American businesses sold just $26 million in goods to the North, compared with $145 million in sales to Cuba.


http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,433327,00.html#ixzz1AHN7QNDg


Given that it is not me posting things I know to be false in order to avoid admitting that I am wrong, it is a bit rich to call me the desperate one. Once again, do you think Koreans are somehow incapable of thinking for themselves?
You post things that are wrong, except you do not know they are wrong. If you find that a point of solace, more power to you. As for Koreans, of course they think for themselves, which is why they don't buy into your bourgeois standards of democracy.


Nothing in other words. You have committed yourself to support of North Korea no matter what the character of the Government. That is telling.
I commit myself to support of all the workers of the world, no matter the character of the government. It only so happens that in this case, the government and the interests of the workers are one.


Since when was I laughing at anyone besides you? The Government failed to cope with the famine and I think it is a pretty safe bet that the people in North Korea know it. You know it too, but you are trying to tell yourself otherwise.
My posts have illustrated the realities of the DPRK, and you laugh at them. That's why I said what I said, and that's why it's true.

The government "failed to cope with" factors outside of its control. You blame them because you lack understanding and perspective and the fortitude to support the cause of the working class.


What do you mean by "facing investment" anyway? Besides North Korea has no trouble trading when it wants to.
I use investment in the military sense. Look it up.

And the DPRK cannot trade when it wants to. See the above article and this:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/6040836.stm

You need to do your homework with more care and attention.


No and I grow weary of you playing the fool. I said nothing about whether I agreed with their policies, only if they were independent of the Worker's party, which they are not. Now if you can name any independent party there, any at all, I am sure your case would be better.
They choose to support the project of the Korean workers. You reject their platform because you can't stand it when people disagree with you.


I see. No doubt then you will be able to show us evidence of a vibrant and competitive nomination process?
Following the announcement of the start of election, the nominees to the deputies will be picked in various places such as, factories, enterprises and cooperative-farms.One nominee represents each electorate, which will have a population of 30,000.

Then, throughout the electorates, recommendation-committees will be convened several times to screen out hopeful candidates (based on a majority rule), who will later be registered as "official nominees" to the deputies by the election-committee and will be publicly known through leaflets and street signboards.

On the voting day, which begins at 10:00 a.m. and closes at 8:00 p.m., voters at first receive ballots; write down their favorites, and put them in the voting boxes which are surrounded by cloth on all sides to protect secrecy.

http://www1.korea-np.co.jp/pk/050th_issue/98070801.htm


That being said, if the process was already concluded, why did 99.9% of voters turn out to vote? If the process was done and dusted, why bother?
Because the people of the DPRK understand why it's so important for them to continue to support their working-class government. Just about every family there lost someone in the war against imperialism, they're not about to sit on their hands and not take an active role in politics.


They would obtain some support though.
'Cause you said so. Right.


I see, so socialist democracy doesn't include such things as competition, disagreements over policy, people voting different ways?
Go back and read my post again. It includes all those things, just not in big election campaigns where money counts for more than ideas. That kind of election is what you would rather see, apparently.


But okay, I will be even more generous to you and let you give the easiest possible example to find I can think of. Show me a single grassroots or independent campaign in North Korea that persuaded the Government to change a policy.
Every policy of the DPRK is a result of the grassroots organization of the KWP.


No it should be better, yet it is far worse.
In your opinion, based on the standards of bourgeois elections.


You make some rather strange assumptions, but even leaving that aside you seem to be leaving out the huge cost of reconstructing North Korea.
Which is also an opportunity for the rich few. You think Halliburton and Bechtel were unhappy about their part in "rebuilding" Iraq? :lol:


That's an excellent theory, the only snag being that it would be politically impossible. Any South Korean Government that attempted
The South Korean government has little to do with it. The US would have the driving role in decision-making in such a scenario, the RoK would be obligated through its treaties to whatever course the US decides upon.


I see, even disregarding your paranoid conceptions of the likelihood of invasions, you don't see any problem with the military being the centre of political power in the country?
Ah, so the RoK and the US having skirmishes with DPRK forces is paranoia. Again, you manage to mock the gravity of the situation.


Well whatever it is, there has to be some reason you are talking such rubbish, is it just an attempt to deal with the cognitive dissonance your position brings?
When you learn about the basics of DPRK history, then my position will be much less uncomfortable to you.

[Demogorgon]

I suspect you are trolling now, I find it almost impossible to believe that you think most of what you have written is true. If you do, I can only imagine what kind of mental acrobatics you must have performed to convince yourself of them
Wrong. That was before the height of USSR-DPRK trade, which was reached in 1988:

That said, economic pressures on the DPRK are indeed mounting. After peaking at about $5.2 billion in 1988, North Korean trade has contracted by over 50 percent to about US$ 2.1 billion in 1994.

http://oldsite.nautilus.org/DPRKBriefingBook/economy/DPRKEconomicLinkages.html

Gee, I wonder what happened between 1988 and 1994.
Even 5.2bn is a very small percentage of North Korea's GDP. If that were to represent the peak of the country's trading then it would suggest that it was peripheral to its economy (which of course it was) and therefore a collapse in its biggest trading partners would not have a particularly large effect particularly when there was another potential trading partner available. Several countries far more dependent on Soviet Trade than North Korea were able to switch to different trading partners. You can scream sanctions as many times as you like, but they do not affect trade with China.


Ah, so your new argument is that there's a huge American-EU-Japanese Bazaar on the DMV, just waiting to do unlimited business with the DPRK. Good one. :lol:Where did I mention any of those entities. You may not be aware of the fact, but there is a large country in East Asia called China.


I commit myself to support of all the workers of the world, no matter the character of the government. It only so happens that in this case, the government and the interests of the workers are one.
And once again, what would it need to do for you to stop believing it to have its interests at one with the workers? So far you have refused to answer, am I to take it you believe it incapable under any circumstances of breaking with the workers?


Facing investment is a military term. Look it up.After quite a bit of searching for the obscure military term of "investment", I have to conclude that it is not even true here. It refers to placing somewhere under a complete state of siege, which North Korea isn't. It has ample opportunity for links with China, not to mention at least some Chinese protection from military invasion.


And the DPRK cannot trade when it wants to. See the above article and this:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/6040836.stm

You need to do your homework with more care and attention.
And this has what tom do with what I said about trade with China?


They choose to support the project of the Korean workers. You reject their platform because you can't stand it when people disagree with you.
There is a certain irony in this coming from somebody who is such a defender of the North Korean state (though probably trolling now) but you will note that I made no judgement at all on their policy platforms, I merely pointed out that they were not independent political parties. For the final time can you point to any independent political parties in North Korea besides the Worker's Party or do you concede the point?


Following the announcement of the start of election, the nominees to the deputies will be picked in various places such as, factories, enterprises and cooperative-farms.One nominee represents each electorate, which will have a population of 30,000.

Then, throughout the electorates, recommendation-committees will be convened several times to screen out hopeful candidates (based on a majority rule), who will later be registered as "official nominees" to the deputies by the election-committee and will be publicly known through leaflets and street signboards.

On the voting day, which begins at 10:00 a.m. and closes at 8:00 p.m., voters at first receive ballots; write down their favorites, and put them in the voting boxes which are surrounded by cloth on all sides to protect secrecy.

http://www1.korea-np.co.jp/pk/050th_issue/98070801.htm
I am sorry, I obviously did not make myself clear. I asked for actual evidence, not an almost certainly false statement. The sort of thing that might be useful would be a news source (not from North Korean State Media) reporting the process was going on, saying how many people were seeking nomination to each position, what percentage of the vote the winners got etc.

If you can't manage that, then I am prepared to accept a North Korean state source so long as it contains credible figures describing how many votes candidates other than the eventual nominee got during the nomination process.


Because the people of the DPRK understand why it's so important for them to continue to support their working-class government. Just about every family there lost someone in the war against imperialism, they're not about to sit on their hands and not take an active role in politics.
But you informed me that the debate was already concluded by election day. If the election itself is a formality performed after the debate has concluded, why take part in it.


'Cause you said so. Right.
No, in fact you did, when you acknowledged there were at least some people in North Korea opposed to the Government. Or have you now modified your position that there is not a single person in North Korea in opposition to the Government? Because that is what would be required for an 100% vote.


Go back and read my post again. It includes all those things, just not in big election campaigns where money counts for more than ideas. That kind of election is what you would rather see, apparently.
Okay then, let's make the examination of North Korean political system entirely about policy debate. As I said, I am genuinely trying to make this as easy for you as possible. Could you give an example of a public debate on policy in North Korea where there was lively discussion of different options? A single example will be sufficient.


Every policy of the DPRK is a result of the grassroots organization of the KWP.
In other words you cannot give an example of any such thing. No matter, I am willing to lower the bar of evidence yet again, now I am only looking for evidence of a public policy debate. If you fail to provide that however, I might have to ask for advice on how to make what I am asking for anymore minimal. At this stage I am asking for evidence of things that exist in almost every dictatorship, yet alone in polyarchies.


Which is also an opportunity for the rich few. You think Halliburton and Bechtel were unhappy about their part in "rebuilding" Iraq? :lol:
No, but who do you suppose is going to pay for all of this? There is no Oil in North Korea to pay for it.


The South Korean government has little to do with it. The US would have the driving role in decision-making in such a scenario, the RoK would be obligated through its treaties to whatever course the US decides upon.
I see, so the South Korean Government will simply sit back and consign itself to electoral oblivion? And the US is going to commit itself to a third war? And it is going to seriously provoke China and jeopardise the safety of Japan and South Korea? For the sake of it?


Ah, so the RoK and the US having skirmishes with DPRK forces is paranoia. Again, you manage to mock the gravity of the situation.

The skirmishes pop up fairly regularly and are often initiated by North Korea. Again though, why exactly would the safety of Japan and South Korea by jeopordised so readily? And do you think China would consent to a war on its border? Your outlook is incredibly naive. The world powers act in their own interests, you are painting them as if their goal is to appease Satan with evil acts committed for no earthly purpose.

[manic expression]

I suspect you are trolling now, I find it almost impossible to believe that you think most of what you have written is true. If you do, I can only imagine what kind of mental acrobatics you must have performed to convince yourself of themEven 5.2bn is a very small percentage of North Korea's GDP. If that were to represent the peak of the country's trading then it would suggest that it was peripheral to its economy (which of course it was) and therefore a collapse in its biggest trading partners would not have a particularly large effect particularly when there was another potential trading partner available. Several countries far more dependent on Soviet Trade than North Korea were able to switch to different trading partners. You can scream sanctions as many times as you like, but they do not affect trade with China.
A small percentage of any economy can sink it, especially when the economy in question is unsuitable for farming. The PRC, for its part, was a net importer of food in the mid 90's, so it wasn't really ready to make up the difference, especially when DPRK-PRC trade wasn't even $1 billion by the late 80's.

"Several countries far more dependent on Soviet trade" went market-reform crazy and capitulated to imperialism. The DPRK refused to do so. There's your difference. Not that hard to figure out.

PRC as net importer of food:

At the end of 1995, net horticultural exports had grown to $3.3 billion, while China's grain trade balance registered a $3.5 billion deficit.

http://www.chinabusinessreview.com/public/9709/crook.html


Where did I mention any of those entities. You may not be aware of the fact, but there is a large country in East Asia called China.
And once again, what would it need to do for you to stop believing it to have its interests at one with the workers? So far you have refused to answer, am I to take it you believe it incapable under any circumstances of breaking with the workers?
It's a question I've answered sarcastically because it's plainly a stupid question. Dealing in such hypotheticals is a silly exercise, which explains your fondness for them. However, when the DPRK stops promoting the cause of the workers, I will withdraw support. That day, though, seems far off. Too bad for you.


After quite a bit of searching for the obscure military term of "investment", I have to conclude that it is not even true here. It refers to placing somewhere under a complete state of siege, which North Korea isn't. It has ample opportunity for links with China, not to mention at least some Chinese protection from military invasion.
It's not an obscure term, and there's such a thing as partial investment. Once again, you fail to do your homework.


And this has what tom do with what I said about trade with China?
The PRC was a net importer of food at that point...so unless they could snap their fingers and create extra food to automatically sell to the DPRK, this argument of yours is DOA.


There is a certain irony in this coming from somebody who is such a defender of the North Korean state (though probably trolling now) but you will note that I made no judgement at all on their policy platforms, I merely pointed out that they were not independent political parties. For the final time can you point to any independent political parties in North Korea besides the Worker's Party or do you concede the point?
They choose to support the progress of Korea. They aren't forced to. You seem to think the latter is true, though.


I am sorry, I obviously did not make myself clear. I asked for actual evidence, not an almost certainly false statement. The sort of thing that might be useful would be a news source (not from North Korean State Media) reporting the process was going on, saying how many people were seeking nomination to each position, what percentage of the vote the winners got etc.
Your only basis for that judgment is your own opinion...your own suspicions. Too bad that doesn't mean much for reality.


If you can't manage that, then I am prepared to accept a North Korean state source so long as it contains credible figures describing how many votes candidates other than the eventual nominee got during the nomination process.
You keep moving the goalposts. I meet one demand and you come up with a new one. For now, you'll have to grapple with the fact that such figures are not published in English on the internet. It doesn't affect the issue, though.


But you informed me that the debate was already concluded by election day. If the election itself is a formality performed after the debate has concluded, why take part in it.
Because it's the public's final say. Because it's an integral part of the election process.


No, in fact you did, when you acknowledged there were at least some people in North Korea opposed to the Government. Or have you now modified your position that there is not a single person in North Korea in opposition to the Government? Because that is what would be required for an 100% vote.
Wrong. The only thing needed for a 100% vote is a strong level of participation in both phases of the electoral process. The elections, as we have discussed, are but a confirmation of earlier nominations.


Okay then, let's make the examination of North Korean political system entirely about policy debate. As I said, I am genuinely trying to make this as easy for you as possible. Could you give an example of a public debate on policy in North Korea where there was lively discussion of different options? A single example will be sufficient.
Not in English, no. Unfortunately the DPRK doesn't airmail random internet posters the minutes to their nomination meetings. Imagine that.


In other words you cannot give an example of any such thing.
Of course I can, I just did. The KWP is a grassroots organization, and thus its policies are a result of this.


No, but who do you suppose is going to pay for all of this? There is no Oil in North Korea to pay for it.
No oil, but zinc, iron, coal, fluorite and other resources. Not to mention a large population for capitalist exploitation. Once again, try to do your homework.


I see, so the South Korean Government will simply sit back and consign itself to electoral oblivion? And the US is going to commit itself to a third war? And it is going to seriously provoke China and jeopardise the safety of Japan and South Korea? For the sake of it?
It can sit back or sit forward...it doesn't matter either way. The RoK has to abide by the US on this issue due to treaty obligations, and if one government gets elected out then the next government will have to do the same.

The US is so unwilling to commit to that third war because of the DPRK's "Military First" policy. It is because of the build-up that it is an unrealistic option at this juncture, and thankfully so.

The safety of Japan and South Korea mean little. The US jeapordized the safety of Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Israel, Jordan and Turkey for its invasion of Iraq. The reason the safety of Seoul is so at risk is, again, because of the "Military First" policy. Good thing the facts validate the KWP's policies.

The PRC is the only real obstacle outside of the DPRK's self-reliant self-defense. However, that is a status quo that is hardly set in stone. The people of the DPRK cannot count on the PRC for defense.


The skirmishes pop up fairly regularly and are often initiated by North Korea. Again though, why exactly would the safety of Japan and South Korea by jeopordised so readily? And do you think China would consent to a war on its border? Your outlook is incredibly naive. The world powers act in their own interests, you are painting them as if their goal is to appease Satan with evil acts committed for no earthly purpose.
The skirmishes last year were not regular, they were exchanges of artillery fire. They were initiated by South Korea. But thanks for showing yourself as an ally of imperialist rhetoric.

I've already addressed Japan, SK and the PRC. The safety of SK is only in jeapordy because of the DPRK's strengthening of military forces (which you mock and reject), and beyond that the only one factor that actually matters is the PRC, which cannot be counted on completely (unless you think the PRC would risk a war with the US over the DPRK).

When I'm the only one posting statistics and facts, you're the naive one here. Like I said, when you learn a bit about the situation perhaps then you'll be able to say something worthwhile.

[Demogorgon]

A small percentage of any economy can sink it, especially when the economy in question is unsuitable for farming. The PRC, for its part, was a net importer of food in the early 90's, so it wasn't really ready to make up the difference, especially when DPRK-PRC trade wasn't even $1 billion by the late 80's.
North Korea was never dependent on trade for food at all. its entire policy was focused on not being so. Do you contend that Juice does not exist?


"Several countries far more dependent on Soviet trade" went market-reform crazy and capitulated to imperialism. The DPRK refused to do so. There's your difference. Not that hard to figure out.Except I wasn't talking about Eastern Bloc countries. You are a fool if you think the Cold War divisions were so principled as to be about political divisions and some Western style countries such as Finland were heavily dependent on trade with the Soviet Union (much more so than North Korea), but they traded elsewhere, there was nothing to stop North Korea trading with China. The fall in trade was part of an attempt to further increase so called "self reliance".


PRC as net importer of food:

http://www.chinabusinessreview.com/public/9709/crook.html
Your grasp of economics is as poor as your grasp on everything else it seems. "net importer" doesn't mean "doesn't export". Britain is a net importer of food for instance yet exports vast amounts. The trade is done partly to increase the amount of food in the country, but primarily to increase the diversity of choice available. China produces particular foodstuffs consumes some, exports the rest and buys more food from abroad to widen choice available. North Korea could readily have bought some of the exported food. The fact that China was importing huge amounts of food has no baring on this fact.


It's a question I've answered sarcastically because it's plainly a stupid question. Dealing in such hypotheticals is a silly exercise, which explains your fondness for them. However, when the DPRK stops promoting the cause of the workers, I will withdraw support. That day, though, seems far off. Too bad for you.
You see, here's the problem. To any impartial observer North Korea is one of the most viciously anti-worker states on earth (do you think I just decided to oppose it for the sake of it), yet you support it wholeheartedly, so I was wondering exactly what it would take to make you consider it anti-worker. Nothing it seems is the example, you have bound yourself to it regardless of policy and don't even have the balls to admit it.


The PRC was a net importer of food at that point...so unless they could snap their fingers and create extra food to automatically sell to the DPRK, this argument of yours is DOA.
Except that being a net importer does not mean what you seem to think it does...


They choose to support the progress of Korea. They aren't forced to. You seem to think the latter is true, though.
I see, no doubt any report whatsoever of them being under the direct control of the Worker's Party is a lie. It seems "truth" to you means "whatever backs my point of view).

Given you have no failed to answer me several times I conclude that you cannot name any independent political movements.


Your only basis for that judgment is your own opinion...your own suspicions. Too bad that doesn't mean much for reality.
You cannot provide any evidence at all of a competitive nomination process then?


You keep moving the goalposts. I meet one demand and you come up with a new one. For now, you'll have to grapple with the fact that such figures are not published in English on the internet. It doesn't affect the issue, though.
I am moving the goalposts closer to you! I ask for evidence of something, you fail to provide it so then I ask for evidence of something easier. We have gotten to the stage where I have asked for the most basic thing imaginable, a single example of an open debate where more than one policy options was considered. Such a thing is vastly below anyone's standard of democracy and is such a basic thing that in normal consideration it could not be used for evidence of democracy, yet now it is all that I ask for, I would ask for something even easier if I could think of anything but I can't, if anyone can suggest an easier question I would be grateful. In the meantime the fact you cannot provide even this has shown your position to be utterly bankrupt.

You have started defending North Korea because you felt you needed to head off any criticism of it in case it became propaganda for war but have ended up taking up an utterly ridiculous position in defence of the state and your pride won't let you admit that you are wrong. I know exactly how you feel because I have dug myself precisely the same hole in the past and found myself defending the indefensible. Given that I am hardly going to think anything the less of you if you admit you ended up working yourself into a ridiculous position, so why not do so?


Because it's the public's final say. Because it's an integral part of the election process.
But you also said that all the discussion and controversy was dealt with by this stage. Such a final confirmation may bring some people out, but not 99.9% of the voters.


Wrong. The only thing needed for a 100% vote is a strong level of participation in both phases of the electoral process. The elections, as we have discussed, are but a confirmation of earlier nominations.
At this confirmation however you are saying that out of over fifteen million voters, not a single individual votes the other way? Not one person is unhappy with who the nominee is? Not one person is opposed to the process and registers a vote to make this point? Hell even that not one person makes a mistake in marking the ballot? I know this is absurd, you know it is absurd, everyone reading this knows it is absurd, why not just say it is absurd?


Not in English, no. Unfortunately the DPRK doesn't airmail random internet posters the minutes to their nomination meetings. Imagine that.
You are telling me that you cannot find a single example of a competitive nomination process, not a single one? If North Korea is such a thriving democracy, then you must be tripping over them.


Of course I can, I just did. The KWP is a grassroots organization, and thus its policies are a result of this.
Well then, if it is a grassroots organisation as you say there will be tens of thousands of examples at your fingertips, I am only asking for a single one, so pick one at random and post it, my request could not be more simple, why are you so hesitant to provide proof of this glorious democracy?


No oil, but zinc, iron, coal, fluorite and other resources. Not to mention a large population for capitalist exploitation. Once again, try to do your homework.
And there is no more readily accessible way to get these resources than to try and invade North Korea? And this population is apparently far more appealing than the various other third world populations that can be accessed much more readily? Try and be realistic.


It can sit back or sit forward...it doesn't matter either way. The RoK has to abide by the US on this issue due to treaty obligations, and if one government gets elected out then the next government will have to do the same.What treaties do you think South Korea has to follow here? The US does not have direct military control of South Korea and this fact has embarrassed it before. you are living in a parallel universe if you think that fundamental policy towards North Korea is going to go completely against South Korean interest. You are so stuck in your simplistic world of goodies and baddies that you cannot see that Governments are looking to pursue Machiavellian interests.


The US is so unwilling to commit to that third war because of the DPRK's "Military First" policy. It is because of the build-up that it is an unrealistic option at this juncture, and thankfully so.Oh of course, it couldn't be a host of other reasons like the military being too committed elsewhere or it not being worth it or public opinion being too hard to bring around, or it being harmful to Japan and South Korea or it provoking China.

And the military first policy cannot possibly be about feeding the Government's power base, after all there is no possible reason why continually merging state and military positions and making military positions the highest offices in the state would have anything to do with that.

Still I suppose the utter genius of Kim, able to gain 100% of the vote no matter what, able to hold so many positions by public demand and backed by his divine father knows best.


The safety of Japan and South Korea mean little. The US jeapordized the safety of Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Israel, Jordan and Turkey for its invasion of Iraq. The reason the safety of Seoul is so at risk is, again, because of the "Military First" policy. Good thing the facts validate the KWP's policies.The situation is not quite the same and you will note that of those it is Israel that really matters to the US and it wanted the Iraq war. Switch over to Korea and look at Japan in particular, America is heavily dependent on Japan for its products and something that dried up that well would be devastating. Why on earth would it risk that? You have come up with some half-hearted reasons why America should have such interest in North Korea over and above so many other countries yet do you really think any of that matches up to the possibility of threatening the vast amount of goods America buys from Japan.


When I'm the only one posting statistics and facts, you're the naive one here. Like I said, when you learn a bit about the situation perhaps then you'll be able to say something worthwhile.
Stop a moment and think. Think what you have reduced yourself to here. As I said earlier your position has begun in trying to ward of anything you think would be an excuse for invading North Korea yet you have come to defend it as some paragon of worker's democracy. To this end you have provided not one single example of democracy their working despite me making it as easy as humanly possible, and all you have posted to back you up is some stuff coming straight from the state propaganda department, hardly an objective source. You have my word that I will not think any the worse of you or hold it against you in future debate if you admit you made a mistake here, so for goodness sake do so and put this ridiculous argument out of its misery. I dread to think what impact your posts might have on anyone interested in socialism browsing this board. It is hard to think of anything that would make socialism seem less appealing than such full blooded support of North Korea.

Has it ever occurred to you that the media isn't trying to pick on North Korea of all places but is trying to slander socialism? Don't you think that the reason it reports various horrors in North Korea might be because it wants to equate socialism with them? You are playing right into their hands by proclaiming it a paragon of socialism.

Once again though, if you take nothing else from this post, please just think of the way you have lead yourself into a parody of what you meant to say. None of the other apologists of North Korea have gone as far as you, they have all said it is worth defending for what it is despite real flaws, a ridiculous position in of itself, but far removed from your one. You have said that once external pressures and their consequences are accounted for North Korea is all but perfect. I know you don't believe that, so please just say so.

[manic expression]

North Korea was never dependent on trade for food at all. its entire policy was focused on not being so. Do you contend that Juice does not exist?
I concede that juice exists, I merely recognize the fact that the DPRK suffered from shortages because of factors outside of its own control.

I like how you shrink from the issue: the loss of the DPRK's main trading partners was a blow to its economy from which it could not easily recover. Only 14% of the DPRK is farmable...and you expect the DPRK to endure imperialist-enforced isolation all the same. Patently ridiculous. Have fun running further from your previous arguments.


Except I wasn't talking about Eastern Bloc countries. You are a fool if you think the Cold War divisions were so principled as to be about political divisions and some Western style countries such as Finland were heavily dependent on trade with the Soviet Union (much more so than North Korea), but they traded elsewhere, there was nothing to stop North Korea trading with China. The fall in trade was part of an attempt to further increase so called "self reliance".
:lol: No, the abrupt end in trade with the PRC as a result of the Cultural Revolution was "nothing to stop" them. Right.

As I've shown, the USSR and the "Eastern Bloc" constituted over half of the DPRK's foreign trade by the 1980's. As I've shown, trade with the PRC was less than $1 billion by the late 80's, not nearly enough to make up the over $5 billion lost in the European socialist states. As I've shown, the PRC became a net importer of food in 1995, precisely the period when food shortages in the DPRK grew dire.


Your grasp of economics is as poor as your grasp on everything else it seems. "net importer" doesn't mean "doesn't export". Britain is a net importer of food for instance yet exports vast amounts. The trade is done partly to increase the amount of food in the country, but primarily to increase the diversity of choice available. China produces particular foodstuffs consumes some, exports the rest and buys more food from abroad to widen choice available. North Korea could readily have bought some of the exported food. The fact that China was importing huge amounts of food has no baring on this fact.
Britain imports about 40% of its food supplies. What do you think would happen to the UK if over HALF of its trade disappeared? Yeah, I thought so.

The PRC was looking at a deficit in food trade, and you're expecting them to suddenly switch track and send large amounts of food to the DPRK, a country with which they had weak trading connections with prior? Naive doesn't begin to describe your inadequate grasp of the situation.


You see, here's the problem. To any impartial observer North Korea is one of the most viciously anti-worker states on earth
By "impartial", of course, you mean "mainstream", which you equate with imperialist propaganda. You say it's "viciously anti-worker" only because you consistently display a vast ignorance as to the reality of the country. With this void, you fill with bourgeois fairy tales about the DPRK. Sorry, you'll have to do a bit better than that.


Except that being a net importer does not mean what you seem to think it does...
:laugh: Apparently, you think being a net importer means you can make more food appear out of thin air by stroking one's Fu Manchu.


I see, no doubt any report whatsoever of them being under the direct control of the Worker's Party is a lie. It seems "truth" to you means "whatever backs my point of view).
"Direct control of the KWP"? Yes, that would be a lie. Cooperation? That's somewhere closer to the truth.


Given you have no failed to answer me several times I conclude that you cannot name any independent political movements.
I have. You moved the goalposts and pouted because the facts disagree with you.


You cannot provide any evidence at all of a competitive nomination process then?
I have provided the legal framework for such. You've ignored it.


I am moving the goalposts closer to you!
:lol: You now want the minutes of the nomination process. That's not closer to me, that's further from possibility. You might as well ask me for footage of DPRK national team soccer practices and an autograph from the head coach as proof that it exists.


You have started defending North Korea because you felt you needed to head off any criticism of it in case it became propaganda for war but have ended up taking up an utterly ridiculous position in defence of the state
You can spit and sputter your protestations as much as you like, but this thread has shown that only one of us is capable of providing evidence, and that poster is most assuredly not you.


But you also said that all the discussion and controversy was dealt with by this stage. Such a final confirmation may bring some people out, but not 99.9% of the voters.
If you were to read a bit about the history of the DPRK, it wouldn't be unbelievable at all.


At this confirmation however you are saying that out of over fifteen million voters, not a single individual votes the other way?
Why would they, the debates have run their course already by then.


You are telling me that you cannot find a single example of a competitive nomination process, not a single one? If North Korea is such a thriving democracy, then you must be tripping over them.
I've shown examples of this, including reports of past electoral cycles and voter returns. What you want is for me to give you audio and video of electoral meetings, or minutes of such things, which is the mark of someone who's out of ideas and simply wants to belabor a tangent.


Well then, if it is a grassroots organisation as you say there will be tens of thousands of examples at your fingertips,
It's at your fingertips, but you're too incompetent to find them. In 1989, membership was at over 3 million. How much more grassroots do you want to get?


And there is no more readily accessible way to get these resources than to try and invade North Korea? And this population is apparently far more appealing than the various other third world populations that can be accessed much more readily? Try and be realistic.
What treaties do you think South Korea has to follow here? The US does not have direct military control of South Korea and this fact has embarrassed it before. you are living in a parallel universe if you think that fundamental policy towards North Korea is going to go completely against South Korean interest. You are so stuck in your simplistic world of goodies and baddies that you cannot see that Governments are looking to pursue Machiavellian interests.
Ah, yes, because satisfaction with what one has is exactly what every capitalist strives for. :lol: Capitalists want more. The DPRK has resources that would make many capitalists very rich, and further it would change the complexion of Asian geopolitics to the imperialists' benefit for the forseeable future.

The US does effectively control the South Korean military, they are allies and so if the US goes to war then the RoK must as well. Therefore, if the US military invaded then the SK military would follow (or lead the charge, whatever some American general decides).


Oh of course, it couldn't be a host of other reasons like the military being too committed elsewhere or it not being worth it or public opinion being too hard to bring around, or it being harmful to Japan and South Korea or it provoking China.
The military is committed elsewhere for now...that can change. Public opinion isn't so difficult to deal with at the moment, you get Republicans to start the war and then you get Democrats to put lipstick on the pig (or the other way around, like in Vietnam). Were you born yesterday or do you remember the UK going to war with the vast majority of its populace against the idea firmly? The imperialists risked harm to many of its allies (Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Israel, Turkey, etc.) when it invaded Iraq...why do you think they would fret when the DPRK would have had no way to reach Japan or even southern Korea IF NOT for the Military First policy? PRC defense is not a guarantee.

So really, you're still spouting the same garbage I debunked three posts back. Persistence, even insipid persistence, is perhaps the only positive you can say for your efforts here. :lol:


And the military first policy cannot possibly be about feeding the Government's power base,
The power base is the Korean workers, who built the DPRK, the KWP and the military.


Still I suppose the utter genius of Kim, able to gain 100% of the vote no matter what, able to hold so many positions by public demand and backed by his divine father knows best.
Of course he got 100% of the vote, he was the only candidate. I've explained this to you about 5 times now, so do try to catch up.


The situation is not quite the same and you will note that of those it is Israel that really matters to the US and it wanted the Iraq war. Switch over to Korea and look at Japan in particular, America is heavily dependent on Japan for its products and something that dried up that well would be devastating. Why on earth would it risk that? You have come up with some half-hearted reasons why America should have such interest in North Korea over and above so many other countries yet do you really think any of that matches up to the possibility of threatening the vast amount of goods America buys from Japan.
The GNP is itching for escalation of tension with the DPRK. You wouldn't need to arm-wrestle SK into anything anyway, they're bound by treaty obligations. And do you think Syria or Saudi Arabia or Turkey were actively pushing for invasion of Iraq? Try again.

America is more dependent upon Saudi Arabia for oil, and yet the imperialists started a war right on its border. Why would it risk it? For profit, that's why.


It is hard to think of anything that would make socialism seem less appealing than such full blooded support of North Korea.
Less appealing to reactionaries, which is precisely my intention. When you once again start parroting right-wing lies about DPRK-RoK skirmishes, you'll understand what that means.


Has it ever occurred to you that the media isn't trying to pick on North Korea of all places but is trying to slander socialism? Don't you think that the reason it reports various horrors in North Korea might be because it wants to equate socialism with them? You are playing right into their hands by proclaiming it a paragon of socialism.
The media calls the DPRK the "Hermit Kingdom"...are they trying to undermine the King of Sweden? No, they're trying to undermine a working-class state by lying about it.

The real humor here is that you actually think, at long last, that the imperialist media is being truthful when it comes to the DPRK. You truly believe that they aren't at all slandering a country they have had a vested interest in slandering since the end of WWII. That really does explain your stances.


Once again though, if you take nothing else from this post, please just think of the way you have lead yourself into a parody of what you meant to say. None of the other apologists of North Korea have gone as far as you, they have all said it is worth defending for what it is despite real flaws,
I would admit valid flaws and shortcomings, which surely exist, if only you were adept enough to point them out. You aren't. So far, you're trying to tell us that a country with land that is 14% farmable is at fault for famine when more than half of its trade disappears, that the KWP starved the people of the DPRK on purpose, that it's stupid to build up one's military with the US and SK knocking on the door, that the DPRK alone incited strife last year and that imperialists not only tell the truth but don't want to take control of the DPRK after all.

All these assumptions of yours are categorically false, and I have shown as much in this thread. If you have valid criticisms to make, I will welcome them, but that is not what your are offering.

[PilesOfDeadNazis]

The NKorea wants to join the two Koreas into a "socialist" government?
But anyway I said that Korea wants to compete with the capitalists, and not necessarily invade other countries.
I'm saying we should not compete with capitalism, we must destroy it.
God forbid North Korea doesn't get sucked into Imperialism like South Korea, right?

What I want to know is, how the fuck does North Korea compete with Capitalists? They are trying to be self-sufficient(and this is very hard for a country in their position). They specifically don't want to compete with them. How is that not clear? The only "competition" they are involved in is military-wise, because they are constantly under Imperialist pressure.

[KC]

This is full of lulz.

The famine was due to a complete failure of the caricaturized form of Soviet collective agriculture that the DPRK adopted, a complete destruction of the soil due to flawed agricultural and lumber practices being implemented over extended periods because of ideological zeal trumping actual agricultural science, the complete failure of the DPRK to import foodstuffs to make up for the shortage (once again due to ideology trumping common sense) and, finally, in an act of barbaric indifference to the death of its own population, the decrease in imports of foodstuffs and increase in military spending around the turn of the century.

Yes, there were floods and droughts, but there are floods and droughts all the time in other countries, none of which experience massive famines that kill off 3-5% of their population. Yes, cutting off of Soviet trade was a blow to the DPRK economy, as it was with Cuba, yet to claim that these two reasons, along with some kind of nonexistant "imperialist siege" (in reality the DPRK was being "sieged" with food aid) are the sole causes of the famine is absolutely fucking insane and beyond delusional.

I mean, did Cuba, who is literally isolated (it's an island) and right next to the US, experience a famine upon the collapse of the USSR, who made up a much more significant trading partner than it did for the DPRK? No, it experienced a recession, but millions of Cubans didn't die off.

And guess what? Cuba has one of the most harsh embargoes imposed upon it of any country on earth (only one harsher that I can think of is Gaza, but that's more of a complete military isolation than simply sanctions). It also, as of 2008, imports 84 percent of all food consumed in the country. It also is not geographically located next to prospective trading partners. So clearly the argument that Manic is making is absolutely silly.

But we already knew he was delusional. His mind was made up long ago, and it's not changing any time soon. The important thing to him is that North Korea is "right" or "good" and that it must be defended at all costs. Never mind thinking critically about it, as his entire world view is painted around the idea that the world is controlled by a cabal of evil mustache-twirling imperialists who want nothing more than to destroy North Korea in order to, well...just because they can. :rolleyes:

[BIG BROTHER]

Manic expression, please for the love of Marx stop embarrassing yourself. You have been owned.

[KC]

For comparison: The floods in Pakistan, the worst natural disaster seen in recent history and probably one of the worst floods in global history, submerged 1/5 of the entire country at one point and directly affected around 20 million people (about 10% of the population), during the worst economic crisis in global history.

Around 1700 people have died (0.001% of the population).

The North Korean famine, in terms of percentage of population killed, was 3000 to 5000 times more deadly.

[The Vegan Marxist]

Manic expression, please for the love of Marx stop embarrassing yourself. You have been owned.

:laugh:

Is that why we're the only one's who's been able to provide evidence for our stance? You know, something that's yet to be disputed, and instead you shifted your weight onto other factors now. Nice use of words too. Man, if only I knew we were owned. Right on brotha!

[PilesOfDeadNazis]

Manic expression, please for the love of Marx stop embarrassing yourself. You have been owned.
Wow, great addition to the conversation. Do you care to tell us how you know the things you claim to know about NK yet?

[Os Cangaceiros]

It's interesting that Bruce Cumings' name has been brought up. I wonder what makes his point of view any more credible?

He is to DPRK discussions what J. Arch Getty is to Stalin discussions: the safe "bourgeois historian" who supporters of such-and-such regime will point to and say, "See guys, it really wasn't so bad! Even a bourgeois liberal agrees with us!" The irony of their use of a "bourgeois historian" (or analyst of current affairs in general) to back up points in spite of the fact that they use that exact label to discredit any mainstream historian who disagrees with them is apparently lost.

This despite the fact that he said (as mentioned in a previous DPRK thread):


I have no sympathy for the North, which is the author of most of its own troubles.

But I suppose that's the wrong kind of bourgeois historianship from Mr. Cumings.

[Demogorgon]

...
Over several posts I have asked you for the most basic evidence of any kind of North Korean democracy possible, one single example of any kind of debate, political competition or disagreement. Just one. And you have failed to do so while continually preaching that it is really a worker's paradise if only I would accept it.

I am weary of your tomfoolery. Either provide a concrete example, any at all of whatever kind you like, by that I mean an example, not a claim the process exists with no means to verify, or admit that you cannot.

[Demogorgon]

But we already knew he was delusional. His mind was made up long ago, and it's not changing any time soon. The important thing to him is that North Korea is "right" or "good" and that it must be defended at all costs. Never mind thinking critically about it, as his entire world view is painted around the idea that the world is controlled by a cabal of evil mustache-twirling imperialists who want nothing more than to destroy North Korea in order to, well...just because they can. :rolleyes:
Yeah, there is the problem in a nutshell. I mean how can one post this with a straight face?
"It's at your fingertips, but you're too incompetent to find them. In 1989, membership was at over 3 million. How much more grassroots do you want to get?"

The German National Socialist Party had around 8.5 million "General members" at its peak plus several million more in terms of military membership and other associated groups. Did that make it grassroots?

Before the unintelligent misinterpret this, that is not made to directly compare the two parties, just to point out that large membership does not grassroots make. Manic Expression knows this perfectly well, but he still said it anyway because he needs to try and convince himself that the emotional investment he has in supporting North Korea is based on reality.

[RedTrackWorker]

This thread shows how little the Maoists/Stalinists actually care about the workers and people who live in North Korea.
Some of the same people, partially correctly critique Dali Lama supporters by pointing out (correctly) that the llamas were theocratic, feudal-like dictators, using torture and violence to defend their privileged positions, obscured with religious ideology.

10 million flowers on Mother Earth convey his love.
East and West Seas blue water sings his achievement.
Grower of socialist paradise, Creator of happiness,
Long live! Long live! General Kim Jong-il.
Socialism, if it means anything, must mean some kind of basic liberation from all the backwardness and cultural dregs of capitalism. This massive secrecy, this worship of the leader, what can it possibly have in common with a break from capitalist society?
It's sad. No one gets involved in the workers' movement in order to end up defending a semi-theocratic, monarchical dictatorship.

[Demogorgon]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SrJMVJyzEp0

vid is probably a couple of years old so things might have changed a little.
I missed this earlier. Can the apologists answer it? Is it all lies, ipso facto for criticising North Korea?

[Demogorgon]

It's sad. No one gets involved in the workers' movement in order to end up defending a semi-theocratic, monarchical dictatorship.
They don't, but once you commit yourself to defending something in principle, it is all too easy to get caught actively supporting it and defending it in everything. That's why I am trying to give them, and Manic Expression in particular a dignified way to back down. I don't see why anyone should hold it against them if they were to say that they got led into a stupid caricature of their argument and that they said stuff they never meant.

So I appeal to them yet again to do so, and regain some dignity.

[Sendo]

EDIT: Oops, I hadn't realized the part I'm quoting is from so long ago.


You mean the country that executed 1,200,000 communists in one summer.. that continues to imprison and torture people for being socialists, the country that has the worlds 2nd highest suicide rate, etc etc... South Korea is a disgusting fascist state, why would you want to live there ? Is the north really even worse than that ? how so ?

(though I guess you would be better off in the South if you're a liberal rather than a socialist.. )

Syngman Rhee is dead. South Korea is still under the boot of US imperialism, but don't discount the admirable victories in democratization and labor rights and civil rights. The courts just recently made libel/slander laws perhaps more lenient than in America.

It was a fascist, collaborator state, but not anymore. People aren't giving Sig Heils, and the left-leaning Hankyoreh is the number 4 newspaper in the country.

Life in the North is far worse, and has been since the 1980s when South Korea became economically stronger and the North started to decline. They have a quality of life similar to America's and many things are far more affordable than in places like Japan. I would much rather be a poor worker here.

In any case, the human rights situations and whatnot aren't as relevant as the fact that at this moment if the DPRK were to fall, what would take its place would be worse, or if better, would be squashed in a military onslaught...not invasion, the original invasion the never ended--just ask the sexual assault victims of the GIs.

[manic expression]

Over several posts I have asked you for the most basic evidence of any kind of North Korean democracy possible, one single example of any kind of debate, political competition or disagreement. Just one. And you have failed to do so while continually preaching that it is really a worker's paradise if only I would accept it.

I am weary of your tomfoolery. Either provide a concrete example, any at all of whatever kind you like, by that I mean an example, not a claim the process exists with no means to verify, or admit that you cannot.
Well, first of all, let me say that it is good to see you completely concede on trade, on famines, on geopolitics, on Military First, on just about everything we've been talking about.

On the rest, you can review my posts, it's all there if you care to look.


The German National Socialist Party had around 8.5 million "General members" at its peak plus several million more in terms of military membership and other associated groups. Did that make it grassroots?
The question is what you think "grassroots" entails. It is perfectly possible to have a "grassroots" organization that promotes and does reactionary things. I thought you would be intelligent enough to understand that as the KWP is progressive and is on the frontlines against imperialist onslaught every day, the large number of members would indicate a high participation rate for the people of the DPRK in this progressive cause.


The famine was due to a complete failure of the caricaturized form of Soviet collective agriculture that the DPRK adopted, a complete destruction of the soil due to flawed agricultural and lumber practices being implemented over extended periods because of ideological zeal trumping actual agricultural science, the complete failure of the DPRK to import foodstuffs to make up for the shortage (once again due to ideology trumping common sense) and, finally, in an act of barbaric indifference to the death of its own population, the decrease in imports of foodstuffs and increase in military spending around the turn of the century.
Ah, again we hear from the famed agricultural expert of our time. Well, Superfarmer, in order to believe any of these things, you will have to also argue a few related arguments...so let me ask you: Are you telling me that the DPRK adopted its own version of Soviet collective agriculture exactly when the Soviet Union collapsed?

Are you telling me that those flawed agricultural practices had nothing to do with the fact that over half of the DPRK's foreign trade vanished into thin air, and that there was a glaring and immediate need for more food?

Are you telling me that there were countries just waiting to trade food in massive quantities with the DPRK, when the US was cranking up restrictions and the PRC was heading into a large deficit in food trade?

Are you telling me it is unwise for the DPRK to spend money on defense when the US military is sitting out on their front stoop, and the GNP and their useless idiot friends are salivating for escalation?

Most importantly: are you really telling me that it is just a coincidence that the famines happened a few years after the fall of the USSR? That it was just a funny twist of irony? If not, then you're going to have to admit that you're wrong.


Yes, there were floods and droughts, but there are floods and droughts all the time in other countries, none of which experience massive famines that kill off 3-5% of their population. Yes, cutting off of Soviet trade was a blow to the DPRK economy, as it was with Cuba, yet to claim that these two reasons, along with some kind of nonexistant "imperialist siege" (in reality the DPRK was being "sieged" with food aid) are the sole causes of the famine is absolutely fucking insane and beyond delusional.
One led from the other. Overfarming was a result of a loss of over half of the DPRK's foreign trade. Overfarming led to erosion, which led to floods. And there certainly is a siege, that is no figurative manner of speech...the DMZ isn't a joke, it's partial circumvallation.

Perhaps you are willing to believe that a country with 14% farmable land can magically make more whenever they want...but otherwise you will have to contend with the fact that the DPRK was thrown into the situation by factors outside of their control.


I mean, did Cuba, who is literally isolated (it's an island) and right next to the US, experience a famine upon the collapse of the USSR, who made up a much more significant trading partner than it did for the DPRK? No, it experienced a recession, but millions of Cubans didn't die off.

And guess what? Cuba has one of the most harsh embargoes imposed upon it of any country on earth (only one harsher that I can think of is Gaza, but that's more of a complete military isolation than simply sanctions). It also, as of 2008, imports 84 percent of all food consumed in the country. It also is not geographically located next to prospective trading partners. So clearly the argument that Manic is making is absolutely silly.
Cuba's embargo is harsh, let there be no doubt, but restrictions in US-DPRK trade is even moreso. The US trades more with Cuba than it does with the DPRK, and it's not because the US is sitting at the DMZ with a bazaar of goods.

The socialist government of Cuba, let us not forget, has been able to develop trading partners in the EU and Latin America (Venezuelan trade in particular has been more than helpful). The DPRK in the mid 90's had very few realistic options: the US has been tightening restrictions for years, and the PRC at that time was a net importer of food. What were they to do?

On another note, it's nice to see you finally coming to the defense of a socialist state for a change. Too bad it's in order to play one against the other. Well, it's an improvement I suppose.


But we already knew he was delusional. His mind was made up long ago, and it's not changing any time soon. The important thing to him is that North Korea is "right" or "good" and that it must be defended at all costs. Never mind thinking critically about it, as his entire world view is painted around the idea that the world is controlled by a cabal of evil mustache-twirling imperialists who want nothing more than to destroy North Korea in order to, well...just because they can. :rolleyes:
Your mind was made up as soon as you saw a CNN report on the "Hermit Kingdom".

But you're right, the sabre-rattling by the imperialists (which was on display most strongly last year) was just a figment of our imagination, no? Those nice imperialists are really fair-minded guys and gals who want everything to be nice as cake in Korea...right? They wouldn't care about getting more workers to exploit, more resources to use, more land borders with two major powers, more hegemony in east Asia and more stability for many of their protectorates! :lol: Your faith in imperialism's intentions tells us everything we need to know.

[Demogorgon]

Just one single example please. If you cannot come up with a single instance of any kind of democratic decision making over the last sixty years then I think it is time for you to admit you are wrong. I know you do not believe the garbage you are coming up with, even if you are trying to tell yourself that you do, but come on, prove me wrong. You tell us North Korea is a democracy, I will give you the easiest way possible to give evidence of that, a single verifiable example from the last sixty years.

You have had the opportunity to do so over several posts an have not, but I am willing to give you yet another opportunity, though if you fail to do so again, I will have to conclude that you concede the point. So come on, prove me wrong, never before in any thread have I offered an opponent in a debate such a simple way to prove me mistaken. Are you telling me you won't take the chance?

[manic expression]

:lol: I can't provide you with something that you refuse to define. I've shown you the legal and constitutional framework of democratic mechanisms, and explained such electoral returns can go such a way in a democratic system. Are you asking for minutes of nomination meetings or a campaign placard or official election returns or audio and video of people debating...on the internet...in English? This might be a surprise to you, but not every piece of human knowledge comes in such a form. You might as well ask for footage of DPRK national soccer team meetings and an autograph of the head coach to prove that the team exists. Maybe you should take your requests to the nearest DPRK diplomatic mission.

Oh, and again, thanks so much for conceding on the majority of the issues at hand. It's nice to know that you admit the DPRK is not to be blamed for the famines, that the Military First policy is a reasonable one, that US imperialism is prosecuting a siege against the country and that the DPRK and KWP are advancing the interests of the working class. I'm glad you've come to terms with those facts.

[Tavarisch_Mike]

I just want to say that comaping the harsch years (the years after the soviet collapse) in NK with Cuba like if the circumstances where exact, isnt very materialistic or accurate. Its true that when it happend both countries where relaying on the SU very hard, but lets face it, Cuba has a stable humid, tropical climate and fertile soils when NK has winters where the temperature can drop down to -50 degres C and 85% of the lands surface is mountains, to think that both countries could have handled the situation in the same way is not correct. And yeah today over 80% of Cubas food is imported, but that hasnt been the way they allways done it, its just the last (8?) years when theive made big trades with, mostly, China, Brazil and Venezuela. When they got alone neo-liberalism took its shot.

And too compare with the flood of Pakistan isnt either to good, considering that unlimited help where sended frome all over the world without anny restrictions, besides there is still things to do there, just because media has stoped repporting doesnt mean that evrything is ok now. Just saying.

[Rooster]

:lol: I can't provide you with something that you refuse to define. I've shown you the legal and constitutional framework of democratic mechanisms, and explained such electoral returns can go such a way in a democratic system. Are you asking for minutes of nomination meetings or a campaign placard or official election returns or audio and video of people debating...on the internet...in English? This might be a surprise to you, but not every piece of human knowledge comes in such a form. You might as well ask for footage of DPRK national soccer team meetings and an autograph of the head coach to prove that the team exists. Maybe you should take your requests to the nearest DPRK diplomatic mission.

I think he's asking for evidence of any open democratic debate rather than an explanation of how people are nominated for leadership. Also, he said that out of a country of 15-20 million, then 100% uniformity of opinion should not be expected, hence, there must have been at least some form of debate or protest.

[Marxach-Léinínach]

I missed this earlier. Can the apologists answer it? Is it all lies, ipso facto for criticising North Korea?
http://www.cpgbml.org/index.php?secName=proletarian&subName=display&art=157

[Demogorgon]

I think he's asking for evidence of any open democratic debate rather than an explanation of how people are nominated for leadership. Also, he said that out of a country of 15-20 million, then 100% uniformity of opinion should not be expected, hence, there must have been at least some form of debate or protest.
Quite so, I asked for any kind of evidence of any level of democracy in action. He cannot provide it despite being asked several times.

To be clear I did not ask for an assertion it exists rather a single piece of evidence of it. If Manic Expression claims that in sixty years not a single piece of evidence has so presented itself then I have to wonder why he is so sure that it exists. Surely he does not take matters on faith?

Nevertheless I consider the matter now closed. By not providing a single piece on evidence Manic Expression has clearly conceded the point and is unwilling to make any attempt to prove any kind of democracy.

[Demogorgon]

http://www.cpgbml.org/index.php?secName=proletarian&subName=display&art=157
That is a review of a previous programme the one posted was a follow up too as you would have known had you watched it. The review for instance claims there is no footage of any actual execution, whereas the video posted shows such a thing in the first few minutes.

So referring to the video in question rather than a previous programme, is it all imperialist lies?

[KC]

Manic please provide some kind of documentation showing that the DPRK was completely unable to fill the gap in food stuffs with importing it due to the sanctions. Do you know what the sanctions actually do or what/who they affect?

Please also tell us why North Korea isn't currently developing trading partners to make up for the shortage right now, instead of (or even while) being the largest recipient of food aid. Why isn't it trading with China right now to make up the shortfall? The sanctions? You do realize that it is in China's best interests to facilitate trade with the DPRK to alleviate the refugee situation, right? Famine brings floods of refugees over the Chinese border, something China is intent on preventing.

Could you please also explain how the flooding in the DPRK is 3000 to 5000 times more deadly than the Pakistani floods, the worst natural disaster in recent history? Is it all due to the sanctions?

Please also justify how you can claim both that the DPRK is completely democratic, run by the will of the people, and then in the next sentence justify the purchase of fighter jets while millions of the population die off in a famine, yet somehow the elections have 99% turnout with 100% support for the government. Are these people that are dying willingly starving to death in order to support the purchase of fighter jets as opposed to food? Are you being fucking serious? Not one single starving person opposed the current government?


I just want to say that comaping the harsch years (the years after the soviet collapse) in NK with Cuba like if the circumstances where exact, isnt very materialistic or accurate. Its true that when it happend both countries where relaying on the SU very hard, but lets face it, Cuba has a stable humid, tropical climate and fertile soils when NK has winters where the temperature can drop down to -50 degres C and 85% of the lands surface is mountains, to think that both countries could have handled the situation in the same way is not correct.

I never said they could handle it in the "same way" my point was that the discrepancy between what happened in both countries is too extreme to attribute it to a simple natural disaster or sanctions as Manic has done. I made the same point with the Pakistani floods.

Which, again, is a valid comparison considering the discrepancy between the two. And the DPRK has received international aid, it is the largest recipient of UN food aid. Providing openness about the famine as it happened would have offered a much greater amount of aid, but that didn't happen.

[manic expression]

Nevertheless I consider the matter now closed. By not providing a single piece on evidence Manic Expression has clearly conceded the point and is unwilling to make any attempt to prove any kind of democracy.
This, coming from the poster who's given up on all her/his arguments but one. But regardless, the evidence is there, you're just too stubborn to admit you have no idea what you're even asking for, much less what you think would constitute sufficient proof. After you give that a bit of thought, let me know.


Manic please provide some kind of documentation showing that the DPRK was completely unable to fill the gap in food stuffs with importing it due to the sanctions.
I can't readily prove a negative. The burden of proof is on you. If you're so insistent that there's a massive American-EU-Japanese bazaar on the DMZ that the DPRK refuses to do business with out of pure ideology, then you can prove that. But you won't.


Please also tell us why North Korea isn't currently developing trading partners to make up for the shortage right now,
PRC-DPRK trade has been growing significantly since the early 80's, with an over 26% rise just last year.

http://ifes.kyungnam.ac.kr/eng/m05/s10/content.asp?nkbriefNO=399

Even in the mid-90's, the DPRK was working to reduce restrictions on DPRK-US trade:

http://www1.korea-np.co.jp/pk/051th_issue/98071506.htm


Could you please also explain how the flooding in the DPRK is 3000 to 5000 times more deadly than the Pakistani floods, the worst natural disaster in recent history? Is it all due to the sanctions?
28% of Pakistan's land is farmable. That's double the land available for cultivation in the DPRK.

The heaviest hit to the people of the DPRK was long-term damage to harvest and lack of food over the proceeding years. The DPRK had to deal with food shortages starting in 1992 and the big shoe dropped by 1994. In a much different scenario, the heaviest hit to the people of Pakistan was inundation and resulting disease, the majority of deaths coming within the year of the floods. Still, the possibility of famine was there, but the international reaction negated it greatly (as of September, however, 70% of Pakistan had inadequate nutrition). Two very, very different situations.


Please also justify how you can claim both that the DPRK is completely democratic, run by the will of the people, and then in the next sentence justify the purchase of fighter jets while millions of the population die off in a famine, yet somehow the elections have 99% turnout with 100% support for the government. Are these people that are dying willingly starving to death in order to support the purchase of fighter jets as opposed to food? Are you being fucking serious? Not one single starving person opposed the current government?
The workers of the DPRK understand that national defense is not a choice but a necessity. When one is under siege by a vicious enemy, you don't blame starvation on your comrades. It's a logic that was driven home by the tribulations of the Korean War.

PS, I'm quite sure the election return statistic under discussion came from after the worst of the famine.

[KC]

I can't readily prove a negative.

Supporting your claim that sanctions prevent North Korea from importing to cover food shortfalls is not proving a negative...


PRC-DPRK trade has been growing significantly since the early 80's, with an over 26% rise just last year.

I didn't ask why it isn't developing trade with other countries; I asked why it's not developing trade with other countries to cover the food shortage.

http://www.nkeconwatch.com/nk-uploads/figure-1.JPG


The workers of the DPRK understand that national defense is not a choice but a necessity. When one is under siege by a vicious enemy, you don't blame starvation on your comrades. It's a logic that was driven home by the tribulations of the Korean War.

PS, I'm quite sure the election return statistic under discussion came from after the worst of the famine.

Okay, so you really do think that they would voluntarily starve to death. Wow.

[The Vegan Marxist]

Supporting your claim that sanctions prevent North Korea from importing to cover food shortfalls is not proving a negative...



I didn't ask why it isn't developing trade with other countries; I asked why it's not developing trade with other countries to cover the food shortage.

http://www.nkeconwatch.com/nk-uploads/figure-1.JPG



Okay, so you really do think that they would voluntarily starve to death. Wow.

Voluntarily? So, they voluntarily allow the US and allies to sanction them? I hardly doubt you believe in the bullshit you spew. The entirety of the DPRK are very militant, whether it be of the Red Army or of the civilians. They've devoted their lives to the proletarian cause against imperialist actions.

Cuba was in a very difficult position themselves when the Soviet Union collapsed as well. They were left all alone and started suffering. Sure, like the DPRK, people fled. But, many stayed, due to their devotion of the cause. They didn't just sacrifice everything for nothing. So to think that those of the DPRK would just up and flee because the struggle is still ongoing is a ridiculous statement, and a spit in the face of all those that have given their lives for the cause and independence of the DPRK.

[BIG BROTHER]

I challenge you to tell me that if the DPRK opened its borders that people wouldn't bee flooding out of it, I dare you!

[The Vegan Marxist]

I challenge you to tell me that if the DPRK opened its borders that people wouldn't bee flooding out of it, I dare you!

:laugh:

Well, given that we seriously can't tell if the majority would or not, the question is quite useless. Though, from what I understand, everyone's allowed to leave as long as it's done legally. Though, that's a process as well, and takes a while.

Besides that, you seriously can't stick with any debate without shifting away from your original arguments and turn to new ones, can you? lol

[Demogorgon]

This, coming from the poster who's given up on all her/his arguments but one. But regardless, the evidence is there, you're just too stubborn to admit you have no idea what you're even asking for, much less what you think would constitute sufficient proof. After you give that a bit of thought, let me know.

The matter of whether you think North Korea is a democracy or not is now closed as you failed to provide any evidence so I will briefly address the view that I abandoned "other arguments". I focussed on that single issue because your refusal to answer it indicated to me that you were either not arguing in good faith or else were using other issues to hide the fact that you could not answer that one. In either event I was not going to let you continue your shenanigans. Further when it became clear to me that you were arguing from a position of complete ignorance, not even knowing what "net importer" means, and were unwilling to enlighten yourself it became clear to me that this was not a discussion that was going anywhere.

[Os Cangaceiros]

The entirety of the DPRK are very militant, whether it be of the Red Army or of the civilians. They've devoted their lives to the proletarian cause against imperialist actions.


Cuba was in a very difficult position themselves when the Soviet Union collapsed as well. They were left all alone and started suffering. Sure, like the DPRK, people fled. But, many stayed, due to their devotion of the cause.

LOL. Yeah, I'm sure that in the early 90's most Cubans didn't leave because they were too enamoured with the idea of the ongoing glorious proletarian state they were living under, rather than the fact that they were living on an island and had families to support.

[PilesOfDeadNazis]

I challenge you to tell me that if the DPRK opened its borders that people wouldn't bee flooding out of it, I dare you!
Holy shit, why are you pretending to be part of the conversation? You are ignoring people when they ask you anything and then jump behind the arguments of someone else on a subject entirely different.

I have already asked you twice to back up your ridiculous statements on healthcare and you have yet to even acknowledge it.

[manic expression]

The matter of whether you think North Korea is a democracy or not is now closed as you failed to provide any evidence so I will briefly address the view that I abandoned "other arguments". I focussed on that single issue because your refusal to answer it indicated to me that you were either not arguing in good faith or else were using other issues to hide the fact that you could not answer that one. In either event I was not going to let you continue your shenanigans. Further when it became clear to me that you were arguing from a position of complete ignorance, not even knowing what "net importer" means, and were unwilling to enlighten yourself it became clear to me that this was not a discussion that was going anywhere.
The matter was closed long ago when you failed to show up. In effect, you have now abandoned all your arguments. You are refusing to grapple with the clear evidence I have provided and have even refused to define what you see as sufficient proof of democracy. But if you are finally able to bring yourself to deal with facts, it's all there if you care to look. Unfortunately, you don't care, because you're not interested in learning about the issue.


Supporting your claim that sanctions prevent North Korea from importing to cover food shortfalls is not proving a negative...
I've already supported that. There are more than a few links showing that trade with the US and Japan is severely limited.


Okay, so you really do think that they would voluntarily starve to death. Wow.
The struggle against imperialism was not voluntary whatsoever, it was thrust upon the workers of Korea; they did not invite this enemy but they must now fight it. I wonder how many more ways you'll try to belittle workers on the frontlines against imperialism.

[The Vegan Marxist]

LOL. Yeah, I'm sure that in the early 90's most Cubans didn't leave because they were too enamoured with the idea of the ongoing glorious proletarian state they were living under, rather than the fact that they were living on an island and had families to support.

And you don't think that was the reality of a lot of those that fled as well? Like it or not, a good number that left Cuba were anti-communists and feared the Castro regime due to their pro-Batista paranoia. Just as there were those who legitimately wanted to take care of their families. Thousands fled the DPRK in the '90s. Have you put into account of all of them and asked them why they left, or do you simply just let those that the mainstream media interview play as the official story? I'm putting money down that you're more towards the latter than the former.

[Ismail]

I know this thread has been inactive for a fair bit, but I just want to bring up two things.

Firstly:

I said nothing about whether I agreed with their policies, only if they were independent of the Worker's party, which they are not. Now if you can name any independent party there, any at all, I am sure your case would be better.I think this misses the theoretical point of the existence of different parties, and I think that Manic's response to you by trying to find so-called "independent" groups also misses the point. You see, during the People's Democracy period as enumerated after 1948 the existence of other parties did not mean that these parties would actually be competitive.

As noted in part 2 of the article "People's Democracy in Soviet Theory" by H. Gordon Skilling (in Soviet Studies, Vol. 3, No. 2, Oct. 1951) we read (pp. 146-147) that:

A distinguishing feature in comparison with the Soviet system was, however, the continued existence of parties other than the Communist Parties, and their sharing of political power in coalition governments. This is regarded, however, as arising out of special conditions, such as the persistence of conflicting classes, and as likely to disappear as these conditions disappeared... Other parties, too, would eventually recognize the necessity of leadership by a single revolutionary party of the working class, it was predicted... Sooner or later the multi-party system would give way to the higher political form of a one-party system...

Other parties, also participating in the National Fronts, are expected to subordinate themselves to the discipline of the Front and to act in the spirit of its programme. In addition, mass organizations, such as the trade unions, the co-operatives, women and youth associations, and others, are now associated with the National Fronts. Restating a familiar Stalin doctrine concerning non-party organizations, Farberov has written:
All the organizations entering the National Front, together with the organs of popular power, constitute a system of transmission belts, linking the Communist Party with the toiling masses.Of course as time passed Stalin's successors regarded the existence of multiple parties in the Eastern Bloc and in the DPRK as being just fine. The DPRK itself was able to move along quite easily in this respect, for even today most (if not practically all) of its legitimacy comes from national aspects rather than Marxist-Leninist theory.

The mass organizations concept had its start with Lenin, who noted that the trade unions, literary organizations, women's associations, youth groups, etc. serve to allow the masses as a whole to take part in the affairs of their society and to be effectively mobilized to meet various tasks. Obviously you can criticize disconnections between theory and practice in this case.

In fact, the existence of other parties 60+ years later can be called revisionist and an example of the bourgeois-nationalist outlook instilled over a communist one (which isn't a new criticism (http://ml-review.ca/aml/China/KoreaNS.htm)). For instance, in Albania there was what was known as the Democratic Front, but this Front had no other parties in it besides the Party of Labour of Albania. Unlike in the DPRK where the "Fatherland Front" claims to appease all groups from social-democrats to Christians to aspiring petty-bourgeois types, etc, Hoxha himself noted that, "The Democratic Front... works tirelessly for the construction of the new, socialist, life and for the education of the broad masses with boundless love for the Homeland, with the ideal of socialism and communism! .... The Democratic Front is led by the Party of Labour of Albania, that is, by the vanguard of the working class and expresses such opinions and such aspirations and carries out such policies as are to the benefit of the Albanian people, while exposing and combating everything that might harm our socialist Homeland. The political struggle of the Democratic Front coincides fully with the policy of the Party, with the policy of our socialist state." (Quoted in Albania Today #2, 1985, p. 30.)

Whatever criticisms you may have on the implementation of these theoretical views (proletarian democracy obviously isn't upheld in the DPRK), I think that talking about the "independence" of this or that group is rather worthless. What matters is the control of the working class over the means of production and over the state, and obviously the DPRK does not fulfill either of those two things.

Secondly:

He is to DPRK discussions what J. Arch Getty is to Stalin discussions: the safe "bourgeois historian" who supporters of such-and-such regime will point to and say, "See guys, it really wasn't so bad! Even a bourgeois liberal agrees with us!" The irony of their use of a "bourgeois historian" (or analyst of current affairs in general) to back up points in spite of the fact that they use that exact label to discredit any mainstream historian who disagrees with them is apparently lost.That isn't how a Marxist should approach J. Arch Getty, or Robert W. Thurston, or Stephen Wheatcroft, or R.W. Davies, or Lynne Viola, or Roberta Manning, or Erik Van Ree, etc. The point isn't how "good" or "bad" things were under Stalin in this case. Getty's books focus on how the Great Terror/Purges started. Getty simply argues that Stalin was not the primary initiator of them and that the reasons for their existence were more complex than what Robert Conquest and others claimed. Getty still says that Stalin was a dictator and that "Stalinism" was horrible and such. He's a bourgeois historian, he's just more honest than others and therefore gets flak from more reactionary historians of his type. He never argues that Stalin was "good" or whatever.

If you want a "not so bad" sort of analysis, then you'd be thinking of Thurston, who notes that the word "Great Terror" is an exaggeration in regards to how the average Soviet citizen felt during the years 1936-1938. Getty isn't even all that controversial anymore, but Thurston is.

[ColonelCossack]

at the present, i do not see NK as a real workers state, or as demonstrating the transtion from capitalism to communism as described by Lenin in The State and Revolution. Or, it is demonstrating that, but it is permanently in that stage, not trying to move on into real Marxism.
HOWEVER, as many of you say, most of my info us from right wing western sources, so i am still open minded as to whether or not NK is a real proletarian state. I suppose i will have to go there...

[The Man]

Yes I'd love to see at least a scrap of evidence of people being imprisoned for insulting Kim Jong-il. Though I suspect you don't have any and that this is just something you've heard in the news and repeated without thinking... (prove me wrong )


Even though there is a lot of evidence, we can't know... BECAUSE THEY ARE SO OPPRESSIVE.. If they really were like you say they were, don't you think we would know more than basic facts?

[KC]

Remember when earlier in this thread Manic put forward the assertion that 99% of the population came out and voted and 100% supported the WPK even while they are starving to death because not a single person in the entire country would put any blame on the WPK? :laugh:

[The Vegan Marxist]

Remember when earlier in this thread Manic put forward the assertion that 99% of the population came out and voted and 100% supported the WPK even while they are starving to death because not a single person in the entire country would put any blame on the WPK? :laugh:

haha Yeah I know, right? Remember that time when you and your cohorts couldn't produce a single sliver of evidence to counter-argue what we presented? :laugh:

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

:rolleyes:

Yeah, because NKorea can't provide for their own people, right? WRONG! (http://sites.google.com/site/nzdprksociety/commentary/dprk-economy---food-production) Say another "socialist revolution" takes place in NKorea. Say the US doesn't take advantage of this by invading when they're weaker than ever. You actually think that, after this "pure workers state" is developed in NKorea, the imperialists are going to step down and relinquish their positions on strangling them to death through mass increase of sanctions!? Puhhleaseee! It'll look just like NKorea today, just under a new, weaker State. (not good at all!)

You see, there is a big, big problem with posting the link that you did.

Whilst it indeed shows that the North Koreans aren't baby-eating re-incarnations of the devil, it doesn't show much else positive.

It pretty much shows what many of us expect; that whilst those awful youtube depictions of the country are probably exaggerated or outright fakes, the situation is still one of abject poverty. They are shown to have the basics: a decent educational, healthcare set of systems, access to drinking water, but still a situation, as your link says, of 'abject poverty'.

You see, even when people are perhaps not dying in the street as those ridiculous youtube videos of the country tend to suggest, North Korea still has remarkable problems, as an existing entity. I'll list some of them here:

It renounced Socialism a long time ago. It's official ideology is one that emphasises the military. It is true that Capitalists will encircle, but this simply is not an excuse to build a society where the military has a hegemony on power and the economy. What does this achieve? It allows them to fly the red flag, provide a very basic welfare state but not much else.

There is most definitely a huge, huge cult of personality around the two Kims. One only needs look at the videos of North Koreans mourning the death of Kim Il Sung to see that something worryingly unnatural is going on in the country. It makes Stalin's cult of personality look minimal.

The hegemony of the military, the abandonment of Communism and Socialism, the cult of personality (in an almost monarchic sense) and the lack of anything Socialist, besides a few welfare provisions, red flags and ties to places like China, means that I really do not see any reason to defend North Korea as a state. Defend it's people, certainly. Oppose western imperialism, certainly. But this can be done without having to defend and support what is, essentially, a quasi-monarchical elite that seems to have almost absolute power over its subjects, supporting them only with basic welfare provisions such as clean drinking water and seemingly adequate healthcare and education.
If clean drinking water is the revolution, then my lips will remain parched for a very long time.

North Korea is a classic case of 'the enemy of my enemy is my friend' - people defend a false position because it is under attack from an entity they see as the devil re-incarnate.

[L.A.P.]

I truly do not understand other M-L's thinking North Korea is an actual socialist state. I like Kim Il-Sung, but Kim Jong-il pretty much ruined any progress that Kim Il-Sung had made. I understand supporting North Korea for reasons of anti-imperialism but to actually support it as a genuine socialist state is almost as sad as supporting China as a socialist state. When arguing with someone about whether North Korea is a real socialist state, they use the "all media is propaganda and lies" argument the same way conspiracy theorists do. They ask for proof that North Korea is an authoritarian single-party military dictatorship but yet don't show proof that it is a democratic socialist republic, and when you show them proof they use the "media propaganda" argument while the opposite could use the same argument in the exact same way when showing proof that North Korea is a socialist state therefore they're using a logical fallacy. Yes, the media does lie a lot especially about socialist states but not all sources of information are under control by a secret bourgeois group so quit that shit. North Korea is not a socialist state and Kim Jog-il is a fuckhead.

[PhoenixAsh]

So...can anybody explain why it s that we have so little members of this socialist freedom state on this forum? I mean...we could probably benefit from their knowledge and examples. However...you very rarely encounter them on the internet.

I wonder why that is....do they perhaps have their own forum somewhere? :rolleyes:

[Geiseric]

I think North Korea has a 1984 esque government to it, but south is still very bad. Both are puppets to world powers, namely china and the U.S. But both hugely repress freedom of speech and personal freedoms. I won't support DPRK but I also won't support the south either.

[Ismail]

I wonder why that is....do they perhaps have their own forum somewhere? :rolleyes:Probably not, but how is that relevant? Do you see any Cubans making accounts on RevLeft? The average Korean in the North is either a subsistence farmer or manual laborer, and it's a bit generous to assume they'd have computers. The DPRK has its own version of Linux (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Star_Linux), but the vast majority of computers in the country appear to be modified versions of Windows 98 last time I checked, and of course you aren't going to see many people with access to Western sources of information.

It's like asking why so few Tunisians, Libyans, Algerians, or Yemeni leftists make accounts on RevLeft. Pretty sure they have more important things to do (like being able to get food) than post on RevLeft to satiate the whims of a Dutch anarchist. And in those cases it's far easier to get on the internet than in diplomatically isolated states like the DPRK.

[Bright Banana Beard]

Revleft is not the center of leftist debate nor a international organization, it is just a goddamn small forum.

[PhoenixAsh]

Probably not, but how is that relevant? Do you see any Cubans making accounts on RevLeft? The average Korean in the North is either a subsistence farmer or manual laborer, and it's a bit generous to assume they'd have computers. The DPRK has its own version of Linux (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Star_Linux), but the vast majority of computers in the country appear to be modified versions of Windows 98 last time I checked, and of course you aren't going to see many people with access to Western sources of information.

It's like asking why so few Tunisians, Libyans, Algerians, or Yemeni leftists make accounts on RevLeft. Pretty sure they have more important things to do (like being able to get food) than post on RevLeft to satiate the whims of a Dutch anarchist. And in those cases it's far easier to get on the internet than in diplomatically isolated states like the DPRK.

My point is that they do not have computers or internet access. As it is considered by some to be some socialist paradise I wonder how that is....since socialist states are supposed to work to the advancement of the economic and social situation of their citizens. They have had more than half a century to get some progress over there... Now...internet was also accesable on windows 98...yet...precious few North Koreans on the internet.

Now you can argue about boycots and what not...fact remains that state has failed.

[Ismail]

I doubt Mozambique, Ethiopia, Angola, Somalia, Benin, Burkina Faso, Congo-Brazzaville, South Yemen and other supposedly "socialist" states would have had booming internet users today either had they retained their "red" façade. Maybe Mongolia would have had it for the urban population, considering how much the Soviets invested in it.

Also for what it's worth it isn't like the internet is the goal of socialism or whatever. The goal of socialism is to guarantee workers' rule and the abolition of capitalism. It isn't like Lenin proclaimed that the USSR was doomed because there weren't radios in every single household or something. Obviously the DPRK does not have workers' rule, so yeah.

As for economic progress, there was certainly a lot of it from the 1940's-80's. Check out "The North Korean Enigma" by Jon Halliday, from 1981 (you can find it on Google.) As Halliday says, "It has achieved remarkable economic growth and advances in social services. It raises important issues concerning industrialization and self-reliant high growth for a medium-sized Third World country (1980 population: 18 million, est.). At the same time, it is generally agreed that the political system is one of the most dreadful ever constructed in the name of socialism: this, too, raises major issues, especially concerning the cult of personality." The DPRK actually had a better economy in many ways than the South did up until the mid-80's, when the US invested a ton into the South.

[PhoenixAsh]

I doubt Mozambique, Ethiopia, Angola, Somalia, Benin, Burkina Faso, Congo-Brazzaville, South Yemen and other supposedly "socialist" states would have had booming internet users today either had they retained their "red" façade. Maybe Mongolia would have had it for the urban population, considering how much the Soviets invested in it.

Also for what it's worth it isn't like the internet is the goal of socialism or whatever. The goal of socialism is to guarantee workers' rule and the abolition of capitalism. It isn't like Lenin proclaimed that the USSR was doomed because there weren't radios in every single household or something. Obviously the DPRK does not have workers' rule, so yeah.

As for economic progress, there was certainly a lot of it from the 1940's-80's. Check out "The North Korean Enigma" by Jon Halliday, from 1981 (you can find it on Google.) As Halliday says, "It has achieved remarkable economic growth and advances in social services. It raises important issues concerning industrialization and self-reliant high growth for a medium-sized Third World country (1980 population: 18 million, est.). At the same time, it is generally agreed that the political system is one of the most dreadful ever constructed in the name of socialism: this, too, raises major issues, especially concerning the cult of personality." The DPRK actually had a better economy in many ways than the South did up until the mid-80's, when the US invested a ton into the South.

Then we are in agreement. Its not a socialist state.

[Geiseric]

Have you ever thought that they received 100% of the vote because

1. It has an iron fisted rule of the people


2. It has no other candidates

3. They know nothing else except from Marxist Leninism as imposed by their party?
I mean getting a hundred percent of a popular vote is impossible, there's always some people who don't like something, that's just how it is. Ben Ali, Saddam Hussein, and Hitler were all voted in with a large majority, but they weren't really fair with how they got votes.
If a country doesn't have something basic like internet, that government is obviously incapible of ruling that country. Jamacia is poorer than North Korea i'm pretty sure, and they have internet in Jamacia. I dare you to say they don't want internet. Hell i'll bet people don't know what the internet is in North Korea. Isn't it obvious, when people can't leave a country, when people are never seen or talked to, when people are seen in abject poverty by journalists, when you can assume that something is wrong? Kim Il Sung was a puppet set up by the U.S.S.R. As far as i'm concerned, he hardly had anything to do with the revolution.

[Bright Banana Beard]

They actually have internet in North Korea, the problem is they are limited to satelite, which is expensive and slow, therefore it is limited to universities and top government officials.

[Ismail]

Kim Il Sung was a guerrilla leader. I don't see how you can say he was isolated from the anti-Japanese struggle. He certainly wasn't a Soviet puppet either, since in the 1950's he struggled against Khrushchev's attempts to unseat him and, of course, didn't exactly follow "orthodox" Marxism-Leninism (as the USSR espoused it) after the 1950's. He was also said to be against the invasions of Czechoslovakia and Afghanistan.

Also the WPK doesn't claim to be a Marxist-Leninist party. It claims that "Juche" has "superseded" both Marxism and Leninism.

As for elections, obviously the 100% thing isn't very valid. For instance in early 1989 East German municipal elections they had the "National Front" (aka SED with satellite parties) win 99% of the vote in every single sector, but within a year generic bourgeois democracy came to the country and the voting patterns were quite different.

The problem was that the national legislature of a country theoretically run by the workers is basically seen as useless in most cases, since it can only really carry out the will of the people and/or the party and doesn't exist for any other purpose. Of course in countries where the workers lack sufficient control over the means of production you wind up with this as the only real thing to look forward to:

The 1987 Albanian parliamentary election took place in the People's Socialist Republic of Albania (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People%27s_Socialist_Republic_of_Albania) on 1 February 1987. Candidates were nominated by the Democratic Front (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Front_%28Albania%29), which was an organization subservient to the ruling Albanian Party of Labour (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albanian_Party_of_Labour). Reportedly, out of 1,830,653 electors, 1,830,652 (100.0%) voted for the Democratic Front while 1 vote was registered as invalid.This isn't necessarily a horrible thing (the legislature of Albania was similar to the one in the DPRK—it basically didn't do anything), but the problem is that local elections in councils and such weren't much different.

Here are West German bourgeois political scientists discussing the theoretical role of national elections in the GDR:

“The function of elections in the socialist system is misunderstood if they are regarded in the traditional way as being a method for approving or rejecting a policy and those who represent it... Because this system sees itself by definition as progressive, as serving the good of the people...

Thus elections have purely the function of general assent. At the same time they serve to mobilize and educate the mass of the people politically. The large-scale preparations for the elections—it would be wrong to call them an electoral battle—are intended to bind the citizens more closely to the system and to ensure their active support for those aims which the leading party prescribes for state and society. The actual ballot thus attains the character of a demonstration, it is ‘an act of self-assertion by the socialist state’. Election day is therefore not a day of political decision... it is a day when the political system asserts itself and, in the eyes of the SED, even a red-letter day. For this reason too it is the ambition of the political leadership to get everyone who is entitled to vote to the polls if possible. Although there is no legal compulsion to vote, the percentage of voters is always close to 100%: in 1963 it was 99.25%, in 1967 98.82%. The higher the percentage vote that can be recorded, the higher is the rate of success....

All candidates must introduce themselves to the electors at ‘electoral conferences’. At such conferences it may happen that the selection committee of the National Front is told by the electors' organization that certain candidates ought not to be selected...

For the SED, elections... are exclusively a ‘means of integration for the strengthening and further development of the socialist power of the state’... the function of elections in the GDR is simply to give assent to the system.”
(Kurt Sontheimer & Wilhelm Bleek. The Government and Politics of East Germany. New York: St. Martin's Press. 1975. pp. 78-80.)Victor Grossman, an American defector to East Germany, noted in his memoirs that, "Candidates for the People's Chamber were questioned at neighborhood meetings and occasionally met disapproval. But most voters dutifully deposited in the box their unmarked ballot with the one National Front slate. Only a few brave souls used the tiny voting booth in the rear. Most people feared that it might seem that they were crossing out names, and who wished to risk a possible bonus or promotion just for a secret ballot? When a fellow student found no pencils in the booths, he circulated an angry petition to Premier Grotewohl. For his efforts he was censured by his SED party group. That was his only punishment; he earned no enmity from other students, but the authorities surely had labeled him a potential troublemaker." (Crossing the River, p. 140.)

[Geiseric]

Kim Il Sung was a guerrilla leader for a little bit, he captured a small town for a few weeks but it was nothing big. After that, he went to russia and joined the Red army. He fought in WW2 and had, I think, a captain rank. Stalin sent him there as a puppet, after the C.C.C.P. Supported the revolution and captured the state. Stalin needed a puppet, and an advisor recommended Il Sung, who hardly knew korean since his education was all in chinese, and who had hardly any governmental experience. Koreans are taught he single handedly beat the chinese. I found that out on wiki in 5 minutes. First things he did was create the army and start building statues of himself.

[Ismail]

Wikipedia isn't a reliable source. Bruce Cummings does talk about Kim Il Sung's activities in his books. Obviously Kim inflated his role and present Koreans as the sole liberators of their territory (led by himself), but that's to be expected by... someone who isn't a "puppet," at least.

In any case calling him a "puppet" is still rather ridiculous. Even under Stalin it was Kim Il Sung who insisted to him that the USSR help the DPRK in an offensive against the South, and Stalin was reluctant for a good while up until he was convinced of a quick victory (which is basically what would have happened had not the US reacted with troop deployments.) This is noted by Geoffrey Roberts in his book Stalin's Wars. Furthermore, as noted in the 1986 work North Korea in a Regional and Global Context, p. 156: "North Korea is significant only because of the scant attention given it in Soviet foreign policy writings and official documents. Since 1975, Soviet foreign policy textbooks offer formal, rather than substantive, references in support of the socialist system established after the Soviet 'liberation of Korea' in 1945. The official policy statements made by the Party Secretary General to the 25th Party Congress of the Soviet Communist Party in 1976 and to the 26th Congress in 1981 make no reference to North Korea, and the Soviet news media also appear to be extremely reluctant to give more than 'lukewarm support to Kim Il Sung.'"

Not to mention that, as I said, he wasn't in agreement with Soviet policy after the 1950's. "Puppet" is a simplistic and crass analysis. The DPRK government was a good deal less of a "puppet" than its Southern counterpart, which hosted various ex-collaborators.

[Marxach-Léinínach]

Kim Il Sung was a guerrilla leader for a little bit, he captured a small town for a few weeks but it was nothing big. After that, he went to russia and joined the Red army. He fought in WW2 and had, I think, a captain rank. Stalin sent him there as a puppet, after the C.C.C.P. Supported the revolution and captured the state. Stalin needed a puppet, and an advisor recommended Il Sung, who hardly knew korean since his education was all in chinese, and who had hardly any governmental experience. Koreans are taught he single handedly beat the chinese. I found that out on wiki in 5 minutes. First things he did was create the army and start building statues of himself.

You sure you've got your history correct there? :rolleyes:

[Marxach-Léinínach]

You're keeping with tradition at least I guess. I'm sure Trotsky saw "Asiatics" as being interchangable as well

[Crimson Commissar]

I have a question for those of you who are against North Korea. Do you honestly think it would be any better under the oppressive capitalist government of the south?

[PhoenixAsh]

I have a question for those of you who are against North Korea. Do you honestly think it would be any better under the oppressive capitalist government of the south?

Are these the only choices? little black and white...you either have a state dynastic personality cult dictatorship or an oppressive capitalist regime.

What actually happened to actual socialism in that spectrum?

The way I see it they are both abject and loathable....the North a tiny bit more so than the south because it pretends to be socialist.

[Marxach-Léinínach]

Well I'd love for a world socialist revolution to happen tomorrow but you see, I live in the real world, and know that won't happen. Also, in that real world you either support the DPRK, which for all its many ideological problems still has a basically socialist economic structure, in its noble stand against imperialism, or you don't. Going for some third option is just a flimsy disguise for the fact that you're copping out.

[PhoenixAsh]

No...its either full socialism or its not acceptable. There is NO third way. It has nothing to do with copping out...it has to do with ideology.

You are setteling because you seem not to have anything better to do or you seem to have forgotten the true meaning of socialism.

I am not supporting dictatorship in the guise of socialism because it is against everything that socialism stands for.

DPRK is an independent state and need to remain so. I'll fight imperialist expansion into DPRK just like I will in every other country but I will not defend the abject system. I will fight that system just as hard as enemies of the working class, socialism, freedom and autonomy.

[Crimson Commissar]

Even if you disagree with the DPRK's policies, it is still in the interests of all socialists for the DPRK to survive and eventually unite Korea under socialism. Yes, the political system of North Korea MUST change, but there's a far better chance of there being a true socialist Korea if we support the regime rather than trying to destory it.

[PhoenixAsh]

Even if you disagree with the DPRK's policies, it is still in the interests of all socialists for the DPRK to survive and eventually unite Korea under socialism. Yes, the political system of North Korea MUST change, but there's a far better chance of there being a true socialist Korea if we support the regime rather than trying to destory it.

That is an interesting argument. I will think on it.

However, right now I feel that there will not be a true socialist state unless socialists take power in DPRK first and end the dynastic personality cult, remove obstacles to freedom and end the closure of the country. That change needs to come from the inside of DPRK.

[psgchisolm]

Well I'd love for a world socialist revolution to happen tomorrow but you see, I live in the real world, and know that won't happen. Also, in that real world you either support the DPRK, which for all its many ideological problems still has a basically socialist economic structure, in its noble stand against imperialism, or you don't. Going for some third option is just a flimsy disguise for the fact that you're copping out.
Noble stand? What exactly has it done to be applauded for it's noble stand against imperialism? Besides the empty threats it makes every 2 or so years. The only thing I can think of is it's Nuclear Program and it's arguable to what exatly happens with that.

[BlackMarx]

Definetly against North Korea. Personally I think he is creepier then Stalin....


Look at his theme song, "No Motherland Without You" on Youtube. (watch?v=Cfg3EgKaOgY), its creepy.

[Sinister Cultural Marxist]

North Korea is just a bully, its economic policies don't work so it extorts grain donations from the Capitalist world.

I think North Korea's military is far too big to justify merely in terms of "anti-imperialism". Cuba is a few miles from Florida, and unlike North Korea which is right next to its biggest ally China, Cuba is isolated from everyone. And yet instead of having a 1.2 million man army, the Castros have focused on ensuring that health, housing and education meet certain minimum standards.

In part, the probability that the USA or South Korea would ever invade the North is nonexistent. NK is one of the most fortified nations in the world, and much of its hardware (such as tanks, missiles, rocket artillery and tube artillery) are arrayed in an offensive, not a defensive formation. And with their large chinese allies across the yalu, its not like they need to worry about defense; it is realistic to think that the Chinese would rather intervene on behalf of North Korea than let South Korea unite under its leadership. In other words, I suspect that the North Korean army is so large not only because it feels threatened, but because its opportunistic and wants to occupy seoul if the south suffers serious upheaval.

And I refuse to call any nation with hereditary leadership "socialist". Kim Il Sung wasn't replaced by a worker, a peasant, or even an enlightened technocrat, he was replaced by another convenient cult figure, his son. And after that, his grandson! Take this with the seemingly increased economic and political benefits of party members, soldiers and family members of the ruling elite, and it seems like many of the worst aspects of Stalinism with few of the benefits.

Lastly, North Korea takes autarky way too far. On one hand, I see people here trying to defend North Korea's economic failures in terms of the agricultural difficulties the North faces. Well, most nations, if they are in an inhospitable area, try to trade for resources. But North Korea, which is so autarkic, has no foreign currency with which to buy foreign resources! Perhaps they should have considered their poor agricultural base before they implemented their "Juche" ideology?

[727Goon]

My main problem with NK is not necesarily the capitalist economic system which isnt that much different than any other state-capitalist country, but how regimented and totalitarian the lives of the workers there are.

[Sinister Cultural Marxist]

Even if you disagree with the DPRK's policies, it is still in the interests of all socialists for the DPRK to survive and eventually unite Korea under socialism. Yes, the political system of North Korea MUST change, but there's a far better chance of there being a true socialist Korea if we support the regime rather than trying to destory it.

I'm not so sure about this. The DPRK is an albatross around the neck of anyone trying to argue in favour of applying socialism in "The West", just as much as the Berlin Wall. It seems that North Korea has no interest in "updating" its system, instead just stagnating it. Meanwhile, South Koreans no longer view the North as a viable alternative, thanks to the economic mistakes of its leadership. Lastly, I question the survivability of the regime in its current form to begin with, the extent of reforms necessary to make it work seem tremendous. Their economy is reliant on chinese aid and food extorted from "Imperialists" in South Korea and Wash DC, and their president drinks cognac while their farmers eat bark. It's every bad stereotype of Orwell's society rolled into one; potempkin villages, "the worlds biggest flagpole", inane propaganda, dishonest leadership, and hyper-militarized marches and political rhetoric.

Lastly, the lengths they will go to to "defend their sovereignty" are excessive, IE sinking SK naval vessels (SK soldiers may be tools of the bourgeoise, but they are people too, no need to kill 40 of them because they sail in water that is disputed) or shelling islands because the North got sick of military drills which may have been provocative but were within the legal rights of the south korean military to hold.

But anyways, I dont know, I've never been to North Korea, perhaps everything said about it is a lie. But considering at least some of the propaganda about the PRC and the USSR were true even if exaggerated, and considering the fact that North Koreans are practically never let out of their country (if it was so nice, you'd think they'd be free to leave and come back!) or onto the internet, I'm very suspicious (compare this to Cuba, where websites like Havana Times and others publish stories that range from pro- to anti-socialist! Pointing towards a free socialist society, not one cloistered by militarism and geopolitical paranoia!)

[Ismail]

I don't let an "albatross" dissuade me from anything. I'm not fond of either the GDR or the DPRK, but if someone mentions the Berlin Wall I just mention that East Germany:


Built it to prevent a "brain drain" and to seek an assertive geopolitical situation in regards to West Germany (which recognized the 1937 German borders and regarded the East as totally illegitimate at the time.) Many clandestine anti-revisionists within the GDR, and open ones in West Germany opposed the wall.
That the Soviets opposed it, and that it was a decision of the East Germans.
That the GDR had a system of so-called "consumer socialism" which sought to emulate the West in many respects, and that aside from the Stasi life in the GDR left many people feeling nostalgic about it today.
That the last execution was in 1981 (a Stasi head (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Werner_Teske) accused of treason), and that the GDR abolished the death penalty in 1987.
That the West basically promoted jumping the wall to arrive in Paradise.
That it was, in fact, possible to leave East Germany provided you had a reason and could wait a while.

As for the DPRK, there's plenty of exaggerations all around, though this doesn't change the fact that it's a poor (not due to their fault), isolated (again, not their fault) and state-capitalist regime which finds it more convenient to uphold revisionist "Juche" and a gigantic personality cult rather than actual Marxism. It's worth noting, though, that a great many South Koreans do not want military action against the North and in fact want the South to develop its relations with the North on a peaceful basis. Many Southerners do not fear the North, they just fear that their politicians start raising tensions to the point of military conflict. The "DPRK is a menace to world peace" thing is a total fabrication of American propaganda, akin to "Saddam is a menace to world peace" or "El-Qadhafi is a menace to world peace," or "Vietnamese Communists are a menace to world peace," etc.

[Chambered Word]

You're keeping with tradition at least I guess. I'm sure Trotsky saw "Asiatics" as being interchangable as well

It's heartwarming to see the DPRK's ruling class' very own defence team on RevLeft coming to the rescue with gems like these but once again they have failed to prove that worker's democracy - one of the central tenets of communism since Marx and the First International - exists in the DPRK.


Remember when earlier in this thread Manic put forward the assertion that 99% of the population came out and voted and 100% supported the WPK even while they are starving to death because not a single person in the entire country would put any blame on the WPK? :laugh:


haha Yeah I know, right? Remember that time when you and your cohorts couldn't produce a single sliver of evidence to counter-argue what we presented? :laugh:

TVM, for my good faith in humanity I hope that this post of yours was not serious at all. Do you really not see anything completely wrong with it?


Well I'd love for a world socialist revolution to happen tomorrow but you see, I live in the real world, and know that won't happen. Also, in that real world you either support the DPRK, which for all its many ideological problems still has a basically socialist economic structure, in its noble stand against imperialism, or you don't. Going for some third option is just a flimsy disguise for the fact that you're copping out.

Just because the economic structure in the DPRK is ideologically sound does nothing to negate the fact that it is never been democratically controlled by the workers. The state is not some benign body suspended above society; it serves class interests. The vast majority of socialists debating here against North Korea apologists support the DPRK against imperialism as do I, but we do not uphold it as a socialist state for reasons that should be glaringly obvious by this point.

It's safe to say that this same group of socialists have always supported Iraq against US imperialism. Should this stop us from calling for working class uprisings there? Should we even have called Saddam's Iraq a socialist state?

Anyway, I remember manic expression claiming that a real socialist state such as the DPRK (supposedly) couldn't get positive publicity or information into the outside world and I just wanted to ask: really? Are you actually being serious when you suggest that North Korea could not provide proof of the vibrant worker's democracy present even if it tried? But they can buy fighter jets, right?

It's nice to know that so-called Marxists would rather eschew calling for working class revolution to see workers in the DPRK instead live under a single-party dictatorship because the DPRK's leadership happens to be - like many other countries that make no pretentions to socialist government - in a state of hostility to the imperialist US. Fortunately, workers learn from their own experiences and make decisions accordingly and do not kowtow to the whim of internet experts who are trying to argue for lost causes.

[PhoenixAsh]

I don't let an "albatross" dissuade me from anything. I'm not fond of either the GDR or the DPRK, but if someone mentions the Berlin Wall I just mention that East Germany:


Built it to prevent a "brain drain" and to seek an assertive geopolitical situation in regards to West Germany (which recognized the 1937 German borders and regarded the East as totally illegitimate at the time.) Many clandestine anti-revisionists within the GDR, and open ones in West Germany opposed the wall.
That the Soviets opposed it, and that it was a decision of the East Germans.
That the GDR had a system of so-called "consumer socialism" which sought to emulate the West in many respects, and that aside from the Stasi life in the GDR left many people feeling nostalgic about it today.
That the last execution was in 1981 (a Stasi head (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Werner_Teske) accused of treason), and that the GDR abolished the death penalty in 1987.
That the West basically promoted jumping the wall to arrive in Paradise.
That it was, in fact, possible to leave East Germany provided you had a reason and could wait a while.

As for the DPRK, there's plenty of exaggerations all around, though this doesn't change the fact that it's a (not due to their fault), isolated (again, not their fault) and state-capitalist regime which finds it more convenient to uphold revisionist "Juche" and a gigantic personality cult rather than actual Marxism. It's worthpoor noting, though, that a great many South Koreans do not want military action against the North and in fact want the South to develop its relations with the North on a peaceful basis. Many Southerners do not fear the North, they just fear that their politicians start raising tensions to the point of military conflict. The "DPRK is a menace to world peace" thing is a total fabrication of American propaganda, akin to "Saddam is a menace to world peace" or "El-Qadhafi is a menace to world peace," or "Vietnamese Communists are a menace to world peace," etc.

To add to your Germany arguments. The US used it in the propaganda but really was not so much opposed to that wall. Not only for propaganda purposes but they really feared a huge influx of refugees and possible infiltration of Marxists. I have heard historians say that they even helped building it. But I do not know any sources on that.


I do not think DPRK is a threat to world peace. Thats reversed thinking. Its an abject system but the threat IS definately comming from the US and ROK.

I am opposed to the system of the DPRK I am not for any military action against them. Rather I would like to see a socialist revolution in that country to restore true socialism.

[Crimson Commissar]

As some other people on this forum have said before, a socialist revolution in North Korea would be disastrous. It would provide the perfect opportunity for a capitalist takeover of the North. What needs to happen is for the next leader of the DPRK to gradually and peacefully transform the society into a true socialist one.

[Antifa94]

I only support the DPRK against western imperialism. that being said, I'm sure it's not as bad as it is portrayed in the media.... just look at examples of peoples trips to the country. I saw a photojournal in which the guy tried to slander the country and utterly failed.

also, Nolan, how the hell are Nepalese Maoists Dengists?!

On a related note, does anyone have links to accounts of the DPRK immediately post 1953-1980 or so? Like, photographs and an account of the history of North Korea during that time period? It seems to have been ignored almost entirely.

[KC]

What needs to happen is for the next leader of the DPRK to gradually and peacefully transform the society into a true socialist one.

LOL

Revolutions are not made intentionally and arbitrarily, but that, everywhere and always, they have been the necessary consequence of conditions which were wholly independent of the will and direction of individual parties and entire classes.