NK's at it again...

[Susurrus]

http://www.cnn.com/2011/11/24/world/asia/north-korea-sea-of-fire/index.html?hpt=hp_t3

[TheGodlessUtopian]

So...? Its just more saber rattling.:confused:

[RedHal]

Yeah all North Korea's fault, the South is totally innocent in all of this:rolleyes:

[Comrade Funk]

Yeah all North Korea's fault, the South is totally innocent in all of this:rolleyes:No, but it's mostly NK's fault.

[Rusty Shackleford]

how is this the DPRK's fault?

[Islamic Socialist]

More blame gaming of the DPRK. The current regime in South Korea has continually broken their territorial boundaries and set thousands of soldiers in what was previously internationally recognized as the DPRK's territorial waters.

[Demogorgon]

It is sabre rattling to try and force South Korea and its allies to the negotiating table on terms favourable to the North. Not an uncommon occurrence in that part of the world.

I hope we are not gong to be flooded with people defending North Korea here. There are no good guys and bad guys here.

[tir1944]

There are no good guys and bad guys here.
There's imperialism and anti-imperialism.
Communists should be on the side of North Korea,despite its flaws.

[Die Rote Fahne]

There's imperialism and anti-imperialism.
Communists should be on the side of North Korea,despite its flaws.

No, they shouldn't. This is the same situation as USA vs. Al Qaeda in Afghanistan, or Libyan Rebels/NATO vs. Qaddafi. Communists should not be choosing which flavour bourgeois tastes better, but condemning both to the trash heap.

i.e. we remain anti-imperialists and anti-despot nutjob. We take no "pro" position.

[Yazman]

I don't agree with such a binary view of the world anyway. The idea that "you're either with us or you're against us" is counterproductive.

We should be more critical than that.

[Nuvem]

Fence riders, spineless cowards, horribly misinformed jackasses and liberals, this is your thread. Hold on, let me get into character.

"IT'S ALL THE NORTH KOREAN'S FAULT! THEY DID, THEY DID,...SOMETHIN! SOMETHIN AWFUL AND THEY THINK KIM JONG IL MAKES THE SUN RISE AND THEY HAVE NO FREEDOM http://insidecharmcity.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2007/05/american-flag.thumbnail.gif AND THEY'RE ALL DESPOTS AND DICTATORS AND BOURGEOIS AND I SHOULD KNOW BECAUSE I'M FROM AN ADVANCED WESTERN IMPERIALIST COUNTRY AND MY STANDARDS ABOUT WHAT QUALIFIES AS SOCIALISM ARE MUCH MORE GROUNDED THAN ANYONE WITH ACTUAL REAL-WORLD EXPERIENCE. ADDITIONALLY, I COMPLETELY TRUST NEWS FROM CNN, MSNBC, THE BBC, AND FOX WHEN IT'S CONVENIENT! I DON'T SEE WHY THEY WOULD POSSIBLY LIE TO ME ABOUT NORTH K'REA OR ANYTHING THAT HAPPENS THERE, OR PUT WORDS IN THE MOUTHS OF PEOPLE WHOSE LANGUAGES WE DON'T SPEAK AND WITH WHOM WE HAVE VERY LIMITED COMMUNICATION FOR THE PURPOSES OF PROPAGANDA! THAT SEEMS EXTREMELY UNLIKELY FOR THE BOURGEOISIE TO DO! DOWN WITH ALL DICTATORS BECAUSE I READ AND UNDERSTAND REAL SOCIALIST THEORY AND LONG LIVE REAL AND NOT PHONY COMMUNISM!"

That'll sum up this entire thread, I think; I should say that pretty well wraps it into one bite-sized post for easy reading and digestion. Those few of us who have actually read what Kim Il Sung and other Koreans have to say and read the history of the DPRK and Korea in general since the August 15th liberation in 1945- that is to say, those of us who have a grounded and legitimate opinion and aren't going to fly off the handle about a CNN article that's probably just utter fabrication- we'll keep making sense and being Communists instead of just swallowing whatever the bourgeois press throws us. We'll also have to go ahead and NOT pussy-foot our way around ideologically difficult struggles, passively support imperialism and call ourselves "anti-imperialists" by condemning everyone and not lifting a finger against US invasion and occupation of countries NOT led by perfect Socialist supermen who implement our particular, obscure, intellectualist tendency to a T.

[maskerade]

Fence riders, spineless cowards, horribly misinformed jackasses and liberals, this is your thread. Hold on, let me get into character.

"IT'S ALL THE NORTH KOREAN'S FAULT! THEY DID, THEY DID,...SOMETHIN! SOMETHIN AWFUL AND THEY THINK KIM JONG IL MAKES THE SUN RISE AND THEY HAVE NO FREEDOM http://insidecharmcity.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2007/05/american-flag.thumbnail.gif AND THEY'RE ALL DESPOTS AND DICTATORS AND BOURGEOIS AND I SHOULD KNOW BECAUSE I'M FROM AN ADVANCED WESTERN IMPERIALIST COUNTRY AND MY STANDARDS ABOUT WHAT QUALIFIES AS SOCIALISM ARE MUCH MORE GROUNDED THAN ANYONE WITH ACTUAL REAL-WORLD EXPERIENCE. ADDITIONALLY, I COMPLETELY TRUST NEWS FROM CNN, MSNBC, THE BBC, AND FOX WHEN IT'S CONVENIENT! I DON'T SEE WHY THEY WOULD POSSIBLY LIE TO ME ABOUT NORTH K'REA OR ANYTHING THAT HAPPENS THERE, OR PUT WORDS IN THE MOUTHS OF PEOPLE WHOSE LANGUAGES WE DON'T SPEAK AND WITH WHOM WE HAVE VERY LIMITED COMMUNICATION FOR THE PURPOSES OF PROPAGANDA! THAT SEEMS EXTREMELY UNLIKELY FOR THE BOURGEOISIE TO DO! DOWN WITH ALL DICTATORS BECAUSE I READ AND UNDERSTAND REAL SOCIALIST THEORY AND LONG LIVE REAL AND NOT PHONY COMMUNISM!"

That'll sum up this entire thread, I think; I should say that pretty well wraps it into one bite-sized post for easy reading and digestion. Those few of us who have actually read what Kim Il Sung and other Koreans have to say and read the history of the DPRK and Korea in general since the August 15th liberation in 1945- that is to say, those of us who have a grounded and legitimate opinion and aren't going to fly off the handle about a CNN article that's probably just utter fabrication- we'll keep making sense and being Communists instead of just swallowing whatever the bourgeois press throws us. We'll also have to go ahead and NOT pussy-foot our way around ideologically difficult struggles, passively support imperialism and call ourselves "anti-imperialists" by condemning everyone and not lifting a finger against US invasion and occupation of countries NOT led by perfect Socialist supermen who implement our particular, obscure, intellectualist tendency to a T.

cool story bro.

I think all of us here oppose military intervention in North Korea. I'm just curious, who are these other Koreans that you have read?

[La Peur Rouge]

Fence riders, spineless cowards, horribly misinformed jackasses and liberals, this is your thread. Hold on, let me get into character.

"IT'S ALL THE NORTH KOREAN'S FAULT! THEY DID, THEY DID,...SOMETHIN! SOMETHIN AWFUL AND THEY THINK KIM JONG IL MAKES THE SUN RISE AND THEY HAVE NO FREEDOM http://insidecharmcity.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2007/05/american-flag.thumbnail.gif AND THEY'RE ALL DESPOTS AND DICTATORS AND BOURGEOIS AND I SHOULD KNOW BECAUSE I'M FROM AN ADVANCED WESTERN IMPERIALIST COUNTRY AND MY STANDARDS ABOUT WHAT QUALIFIES AS SOCIALISM ARE MUCH MORE GROUNDED THAN ANYONE WITH ACTUAL REAL-WORLD EXPERIENCE. ADDITIONALLY, I COMPLETELY TRUST NEWS FROM CNN, MSNBC, THE BBC, AND FOX WHEN IT'S CONVENIENT! I DON'T SEE WHY THEY WOULD POSSIBLY LIE TO ME ABOUT NORTH K'REA OR ANYTHING THAT HAPPENS THERE, OR PUT WORDS IN THE MOUTHS OF PEOPLE WHOSE LANGUAGES WE DON'T SPEAK AND WITH WHOM WE HAVE VERY LIMITED COMMUNICATION FOR THE PURPOSES OF PROPAGANDA! THAT SEEMS EXTREMELY UNLIKELY FOR THE BOURGEOISIE TO DO! DOWN WITH ALL DICTATORS BECAUSE I READ AND UNDERSTAND REAL SOCIALIST THEORY AND LONG LIVE REAL AND NOT PHONY COMMUNISM!"

That'll sum up this entire thread, I think; I should say that pretty well wraps it into one bite-sized post for easy reading and digestion. Those few of us who have actually read what Kim Il Sung and other Koreans have to say and read the history of the DPRK and Korea in general since the August 15th liberation in 1945- that is to say, those of us who have a grounded and legitimate opinion and aren't going to fly off the handle about a CNN article that's probably just utter fabrication- we'll keep making sense and being Communists instead of just swallowing whatever the bourgeois press throws us. We'll also have to go ahead and NOT pussy-foot our way around ideologically difficult struggles, passively support imperialism and call ourselves "anti-imperialists" by condemning everyone and not lifting a finger against US invasion and occupation of countries NOT led by perfect Socialist supermen who implement our particular, obscure, intellectualist tendency to a T.

Oh shut the fuck up. Your support for "anti-imperialism" lies in supporting a bourgeois state. The only people that deserve our support in this situation are the working classes of both Koreas.

[Leftsolidarity]

btw.............. DPRK is a bourgeois state? Please, do tell.......

[Conscript]

Your support for "anti-imperialism" lies in supporting a bourgeois state.On the flip side of the coin, we're not doing the korean working class any good by refusing to take a position on any conflict in the korean peninsula outside of 'nothing to see here, just capitalists duking it out'.


btw.............. DPRK is a bourgeois state? Please, do tell.......

By that he probably means it is state capitalist, which it is, but it isn't really the model bourgeois state. The same way any independent palestine wouldn't be the model bourgeois state, too much focus on national liberation and not imperialism, thus the opportunity for international communism to fight the world's empires.

[ВАЛТЕР]

Anybody else think they get their threats from James Bond villains?

I mean "Sea of Fire" really? That's pretty cliche.

[La Peur Rouge]

btw.............. DPRK is a bourgeois state? Please, do tell.......

Go ahead and tell us what the DPRK really is then if I'm wrong. I'll gladly stand corrected.


On the flip side of the coin, we're not doing the korean working class any good by refusing to take a position on any conflict in the korean peninsula outside of 'nothing to see here, just capitalists duking it out'.


I am taking a position. What doesn't do the Korean working class any good is picking this or that capitalist state to fucking send workers to their deaths.

[Leftsolidarity]

Go ahead and tell us what the DPRK really is then if I'm wrong. I'll gladly stand corrected.





Well for it to be a bourgeois state it would need a bourgeoisie. Which it doesn't.

[ВАЛТЕР]

Well for it to be a bourgeois state it would need a bourgeoisie. Which it doesn't.

I'm pretty sure that dear leader Kim and the party have taken the place of the bourgeoisie. In that they have become the bourgeoisie themselves.

[Rooster]

There's imperialism and anti-imperialism.
Communists should be on the side of North Korea,despite its flaws.

So anti-imperialism just means to you anti-military occupation by US troops and not anti-foreign capital investment within your own country and the selling of your country's labour power to help create capital?

[Leftsolidarity]

I'm pretty sure that dear leader Kim and the party have taken the place of the bourgeoisie. In that they have become the bourgeoisie themselves.

They aren't a class of capitalists. They might not be good but that doesn't make them the bourgeoisie.

[#FF0000]

They aren't a class of capitalists.

Why not?

[Leftsolidarity]

Why not?

I would say the burden of proof rests on those claiming that they are capitalists.

[#FF0000]

I would say the burden of proof rests on those claiming that they are capitalists.

They control the means of production.

[Susurrus]

I would say the burden of proof rests on those claiming that they are capitalists.

They control the state, which controls the means of production and employs wage labour.



By bourgeoisie is meant the class of modern capitalists, owners of the means of social production and employers of wage labour.
-Engels.

[tir1944]

So anti-imperialism just means to you anti-military occupation by US troops and not anti-foreign capital investment within your own country and the selling of your country's labour power to help create capital?
I am against it,but it's something NK itself decided to start because they deemed it'd be useful...

[Rooster]

I am against it,but it's something NK itself decided to start because they deemed it'd be useful...

So anti-imperialism is okay when you compromise it a little, then?

[tir1944]

Again,we aren't the vanguard of the Korean working class.
Antiimperialism today means primarily opposing the West's exploitation of and attacks on other countries...

[piet11111]

They control the means of production.


They control the state, which controls the means of production and employs wage labour.

AKA state capitalist using the extracted surplus value to live like billionaires he was the worlds biggest single buyer of Hennessy cognac.

[tbasherizer]

Well for it to be a bourgeois state it would need a bourgeoisie. Which it doesn't.

*Need to have one.

I agree- North Korea isn't a bourgeois state- the conditions of capitalism never existed there, and with the Kim Dynasty redefining the term 'Hermit Kingdom', I daresay they never have. North Korea is the feudal fiefdom of the Kim family and their functionaries. They only use vaguely socialist rhetoric in foreign propaganda, relying on petty nationalism and hero-worship domestically. I've watched videos from the KFA that show how shit Pyongyang is, let alone the rest of the country. A south-oriented reunification would do the working class of the North a major favour, since it would remove the national conflict that just gets in the way of the class struggle. Not to mention get some food in their bellies. Subaru's CEO would rather have operational assembly line workers than the undying worship of dying peasants.

[Per Levy]

Again,we aren't the vanguard of the Korean working class.

very true, but the north korean state isnt either.


Antiimperialism today means primarily opposing the West's exploitation of and attacks on other countries...

so if russia and china exploit other nations we shouldnt oppose it then because only western imperialism is bad? also my problem with your defenition up there is that its kinda the reason why some hardcore anti-imperialists like to jump in bed with every bourgeois asshole that isnt pro west for the moment.

[tir1944]

so if russia and china exploit other nations we shouldnt oppose it then because only western imperialism is bad?No,of course not,but today Western imperialism is still the strongest.Remember that i was talking about what "contemporary antiimperialism is mostly about".


also my problem with your defenition up there is that its kinda the reason why some hardcore anti-imperialists like to jump in bed with every bourgeois asshole that isnt pro west for the moment. I don't know what does my "definition"(which it isn't) has to do with people "jumping in beds" with anti-western states.
Antiimperialism is about opposing exploitation,injustice and aggression,not about jumping in bed with bourgeois states...

[Garret]

Antiimperialism is about opposing exploitation,injustice and aggression,not about jumping in bed with bourgeois states...
North Korea is all three of those things... no coincidence?

[Conscript]

I am taking a position. What doesn't do the Korean working class any good is picking this or that capitalist state to fucking send workers to their deaths.

That's a perfectly rational position, for an inter-imperialist war. Surely you can see the difference between any imperialist invasion of the DPRK and WW1? Would you take the same position if you replaced the DPRK with, say, palestine?

[tir1944]

It's not an imperialist country,is it?

[Garret]

It's not an imperialist country,is it?
It depends upon Chinese imperialism, for where would their so-called self-reliant (Bollucks) economy go if they weren't in the Chinese state's reach?

There is not truly non-imperialist part of the globe, just as no part of the globe hasn't been touched by Capitalism. Capitalism intrinsically leans towards Imperialism, and likewise a few imperialist states come out on top.

[Conscript]

It's not an imperialist country,is it?

It isn't but it's also not that anti-imperialist (only to the extent imperialists fight it), look at its friendship with China. If the east created its own bloc of imperialists to oppose the west, I have little doubt the DPRK would join it.

[Ocean Seal]

Anyone else notice how its funny that they have an article on North Korean aggression when the first sentence of the article is "One day after South Korea staged exercises near Yeonpyeong Island". Oh well bourgeois press I guess. More reason to stockpile more troops near North Korea. Also I don't understand why everyone on this forum cares so much about supporting/ not supporting Kim Jong Il out of anti-imperialism or some other kind of solidarity. Has anyone stopped to think that it really doesn't matter whether or not we support Kim Jong Il, and I doubt he cares either way. Let's focus on what's important: not letting this become an excuse for US/SK militarism, and to keep focused on preventing an intervention. I'm pretty sure that's common ground here for everyone. And for any stragglers that believe in "humanitarian imperialism" well fuck you.

[Leftsolidarity]

They control the state, which controls the means of production and employs wage labour.





I want to point out that I do not think that the DPRK is socialist in any way btw

I don't think they have a bourgeoisie though. I think it runs more along the lines of some creepy pseudo-fascist/feudal/state capitalist thing that is new. I think it is such a strange system that it can't really be thrown into one catagory. I don't agree that it has a class of capitalists though.

[Conscript]

There only needs to be capital to be ruled by its nature, you don't need a formal class of capitalists. The north korean state runs like one large, all-encompassing corporation, with all of the nation's resources as its capital. The nature of juche leaves no room for domestic or foreign investors, but its still capitalist.

[Susurrus]

I want to point out that I do not think that the DPRK is socialist in any way btw

I don't think they have a bourgeoisie though. I think it runs more along the lines of some creepy pseudo-fascist/feudal/state capitalist thing that is new. I think it is such a strange system that it can't really be thrown into one catagory. I don't agree that it has a class of capitalists though.

The party/military elites?

[Leftsolidarity]

The party/military elites?

Do you mean do I think that would be the ruling class? I guess so. One of the reasons I say it's strange is because it seems to be less of a ruling class but more of a ruling caste.

[Susurrus]

Do you mean do I think that would be the ruling class? I guess so. One of the reasons I say it's strange is because it seems to be less of a ruling class but more of a ruling caste.

Since they own the means of production and employ wage labour, wouldn't they fall into the definition of bourgeoisie?

[Leftsolidarity]

Since they own the means of production and employ wage labour, wouldn't they fall into the definition of bourgeoisie?

I don't feel that accurately describes them. What if the working class seized power, controlled the means of production, and distributed earnings through wages? Would that make the working class the capitalist class? I don't think so.

I think the ruling caste in the DPRK is completely seperate from what would be considered the bourgeoisie. They might have the same traits but I think it would be an over-simplification to consider them the bourgeoisie.

[Agathor]

Again,we aren't the vanguard of the Korean working class.
Antiimperialism today means primarily opposing the West's exploitation of and attacks on other countries...
Anything but imperialism, right?

http://www.amnesty.org/en/news-and-updates/starving-north-koreans-forced-survive-diet-grass-and-tree-bark-2010-07-14
http://www.amnesty.org/en/news-and-updates/report/north-koreas-crumbling-health-system-dire-need-aid-2010-07-14
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/March_of_Tribulation

[SHORAS]

I think North Korea has its foreign 'interests' like any other state, mostly in Africa. On the Socialism propaganda being external only where does this idea come from? Not according to the little Korean history, excerpts from Kim Il Sung and personal testimony that I have read.

[MustCrushCapitalism]

I'm with the North on this. They have issues, but undeniably they are anti-imperialist.

[Susurrus]

The fact that they have admitted to kidnapping foreign nationals and have an intelligence agency that murders dissidents in other countries speaks against them being anti-imperialist. A smaller empire is still an empire, and wishes for an empire is still imperialism. If NK had the power to, it would invade its neighbors at the drop of a hat. Not to mention their oppressive and exploitative nature.

Oh yes, and blew up a civilian south korean airplane.

[thefinalmarch]

"defend north korea from imperialism!"

lol alright stalinists, go to north korea and put your money where your mouth is.

your purported "defense" amounts to nothing but ideological posturing here.

[Thirsty Crow]

I am against it,but it's something NK itself decided to start because they deemed it'd be useful...
Oh hey guys, imperialism is okay as long as a ruling class invites another ruling class to exploit the working class.

[SHORAS]

"defend north korea from imperialism!"

lol alright stalinists, go to north korea and put your money where your mouth is.

your purported "defense" amounts to nothing but ideological posturing here.

I can understand why once having learnt some modern Korean history people would be sympathetic to the North. Even Australians were fighting in the Korean War, guess who's side? Given the level of destruction, cruelty etc the North experienced (much higher than the US backed south, who killed numerous times more civilians and so on) proceeded to bomb during armistice talks to provoke the North and broke armistice by placing numerous nuclear weapons in the South, had ultimate control on Southern military (don't know if this is still the case?), sections of US also wanted to atomic bomb the North and had far larger support than the North from allies. The US also continues to practice the destruction of the North once a year and God knows what other activities it gets up to, oh yeah the sanctions as well.

But supporting it as a state, I don't know why you would do that or what it would actually mean in reality. I think having sympathy and trying to learn a bit about Korea is different from any 'support' one might give.

[Leftsolidarity]

"defend north korea from imperialism!"

lol alright stalinists, go to north korea and put your money where your mouth is.

your purported "defense" amounts to nothing but ideological posturing here.

What a shit argument. You're the same as the idiots who say "YA LYK SOCIALISM SO MUCH Y DON'T TA MOVE 2 LYK CHINA BRO?!!!1!?11???"

[Agathor]

I'm with the North on this.
Do you really think the proletariat of North Korea appreciate your support for their autocratic ruling caste? You're not supporting ordinary North Koreans, you're with their enemies.

[Pretty Flaco]

The US also continues to practice the destruction of the North once a year and God knows what other activities it gets up to, oh yeah the sanctions as well.


Could you clarify what you're referring to?

[thefinalmarch]

What a shit argument. You're the same as the idiots who say "YA LYK SOCIALISM SO MUCH Y DON'T TA MOVE 2 LYK CHINA BRO?!!!1!?11???"
Actually I was taking the piss out of the Stalinists' "support" for North Korea, which does literally nothing in the real world to defend North Korea from any sort of foreign aggression. This purported "support" remains purely ideological and lies solely within the abstract.

And my argument isn't anything like that. "Go to North Korea and put your money where your mouth is" was not a call to "move to North Korea to see what communism does". Perhaps you misinterpreted what I said, and given the similarity of it to the sentiment echoed by the right wing, I can see why.

However, it was and still remains a call for the stalinists to go and actually contribute something to the military defense of the country, like, say, taking up arms and joining the KPA. If the Stalinists are actually serious about defending North Korea, they should be shipping off to North Korea tomorrow.

Of course they're all talk and no action, because never in their wildest dreams would they actually do anything of any material consequence to "support" or "defend" the North.

There's a reason why I call the "anti-imperialist" sentiment "ideological posturing"; all it amounts to is a way to increase one's revolutionary street cred.

[Rusty Shackleford]

Look, the DPRK is not perfect, no society that has tried to build socialism was perfect. Because of the loss of the USSR and non-existence of revolutions in the western advanced-capitalist countries, deformities developed.

Peaceful Coexistence and accepting Detente were both unrevolutionary but no one in the Soviet Union wanted another massive bloody war. The DPRK's military policy is a reflection on the fact that if they didnt have such capabilities, there would be a bloody war which would likely end up in the defeat of any gains made by socialist construction in the DPRK.

The DPRK is fighting for survival but also for unification, the peninsula is a nation divided by two states, one a giant base for a major imperialist power, and another, a poverty stricken state under constant threat of invasion by the US/ROK.

No, its not awesome that they had to put military as a first priority, but its pretty much their only option. Also, its not like the KPA is some entity that lives off of other peoples work, they are also doing work in society, construction and what not.

I wouldnt call the leadership of the DPRK bourgeois though. There are very real problems in the DPRK and almost all of them revolve around the loss of their largest trading partner the USSR and the virtual blockade, embargo, and military encirclement by the US and its tools in the region.

[Sperm-Doll Setsuna]

Because of the loss of the USSR and non-existence of revolutions in the western advanced-capitalist countries, deformities developed.


But the DPRK's deformities, including the prevalence of a nationalist ideological basis similar to that of Ceaucescu, rather go back to the very formation of the state and the Korean war, and cannot be said to be the result of time; those corruptions were there when it came to be (though they have worsened). Kim Il-Sung was hardly a robust communist ideologically.

[Rusty Shackleford]

But the DPRK's deformities, including the prevalence of a nationalist ideological basis similar to that of Ceaucescu, rather go back to the very formation of the state and the Korean war, and cannot be said to be the result of time; those corruptions were there when it came to be (though they have worsened). Kim Il-Sung was hardly a robust communist ideologically.
i cant really speak on the DPRK very well due to my lack of in depth knowledge of it. so, i may seem very inarticulate,(personally) on the subject.

[SHORAS]

Could you clarify what you're referring to?


The "War Games" it takes part in. On the surface they might appear as if they are rudimentary military drills but they are much more than this. They test how an enemy reacts and there can be confusion over whether an attack is actually really happening. I imagine there is something quite genuine about the North being on alert not just during "War Games". It probably effects all manner of things in the North including having a strong psychological effect.
They are probably in the closest thing you can get to war without being at war. Just think if the USA was conducting "War Games" in the North Sea with Scotland with England being hostile to the USA.

On the Korean War I have read about strong council organisation in the South as well as the North but not much on specifics, what their nature was or what happened to them etc

[Leftsolidarity]

Actually I was taking the piss out of the Stalinists' "support" for North Korea, which does literally nothing in the real world to defend North Korea from any sort of foreign aggression. This purported "support" remains purely ideological and lies solely within the abstract.

And my argument isn't anything like that. "Go to North Korea and put your money where your mouth is" was not a call to "move to North Korea to see what communism does". Perhaps you misinterpreted what I said, and given the similarity of it to the sentiment echoed by the right wing, I can see why.

However, it was and still remains a call for the stalinists to go and actually contribute something to the military defense of the country, like, say, taking up arms and joining the KPA. If the Stalinists are actually serious about defending North Korea, they should be shipping off to North Korea tomorrow.

Of course they're all talk and no action, because never in their wildest dreams would they actually do anything of any material consequence to "support" or "defend" the North.

There's a reason why I call the "anti-imperialist" sentiment "ideological posturing"; all it amounts to is a way to increase one's revolutionary street cred.


Stop with your bullshit name calling to. You're just trying to de-legitimize their point by calling them "stalinists". That's childish name calling.

[Yazman]

*Need to have one.

I agree- North Korea isn't a bourgeois state- the conditions of capitalism never existed there, and with the Kim Dynasty redefining the term 'Hermit Kingdom', I daresay they never have. North Korea is the feudal fiefdom of the Kim family and their functionaries. They only use vaguely socialist rhetoric in foreign propaganda, relying on petty nationalism and hero-worship domestically. I've watched videos from the KFA that show how shit Pyongyang is, let alone the rest of the country. A south-oriented reunification would do the working class of the North a major favour, since it would remove the national conflict that just gets in the way of the class struggle. Not to mention get some food in their bellies. Subaru's CEO would rather have operational assembly line workers than the undying worship of dying peasants.

I doubt it would do any sort of favour to the South, though. Eastern Germany still isn't over reunification, and the divide between the Germanies was nowhere near as massive as it is between the Koreas. In fact, I've seen reports of polls that say most people in the South couldn't care less about unification anymore.

I am not advocating against unification, just saying that if it occurs anything like Germany's (immediate annexation of the East) it would be absolutely disastrous for the South, and would probably drag down the standard of living for many workers.

It would of course be much better for the workers in the North - it's pretty fucking sad when there's a place in 2011 that capitalism can still be progressive.

Examples:

http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=55517

snippet:
But this lofty dream often gets lost in confusion and sometimes humiliation, as these young North Korean realise how different they are from South Korean youths.

The biggest difference is their divergence on the unification issue. In a unification camp rally held in April, undergraduates from both South and North gathered to talk about their vision on the unification of two Koreas.

"Why should we bother to unify two Koreas?" said a student from South Korea. "We must recognise that two Koreans have drifted too far away from each other. Therefore, wouldn't it be more comfortable for two Koreas to stay apart as it is now?"

A dozen North Korean students in the meeting were taken aback. "How shocked I was," said Lee Hyun- Ji (not his real name) a 25-year-old student from the North.

"The way she talks is a far departure from the way we used to speak in North Korea. Back in the 1990s when I was kid in the North, we falsely believed South Koreans were worse off than we were. And our dream was to unify two Koreas so that we may help South Korea with food."

Even more frustrating for North Korean students was the thought that the South Korean’s views seemed to represent the opinion of the majority of South Korean students on the reunifications. "Many of our friends believe two Koreas are too different to stay together in the same state entity," said Kim Ju-Ri, 21, a South Korean student in Handong University in the southern city of Pohang.

South Korean youths by and large not only not giving a shit about unification, but actively speaking out against it. In drastic contrast to those of the North who seem disillusioned with this development. That's from 2011.

Another one:

http://asiancorrespondent.com/23451/south-koreans-no-more-aid-to-north-koreans/

snippet:
Eight in ten Koreans say that no further aid should be granted to North Korean refugees, a study has found, showing the gap between them and other domestic residents.
With their number increasing yearly, further preparations are needed to help them adapt to South Korean society, the study found.
On the 30th the Busan Human Rights Center (부산인권상담센터) and the Busan branch of the National Pension Service held a conference titled “Seeking a Plan to Support North Korean Refugees Living Situation.” At the conference Lee Geum-su, senior researcher with the Korea Institute for National Unification (http://www.kinu.or.kr/), spoke to the results of the study conducted by Millward Brown Media Research (http://www.mediaresearch.co.kr/) with 250 South Korean citizens and 50 North Korean residents. 78.4% of respondents answered “no” to the question, “is there a need to offer North Korean refugees more money to help them settle down?”
Asked what they think of North Korean refugees, 57.6% responded “no special feelings,” and 19.2% said they “feel they are like foreigners.” Just 23.2% answered, “being of the same race I feel in brotherhood with them.” Asked their opinions of South Koreans, the 48.0% of the refugees said, “being of the same race I feel in brotherhood with them,” showing a notable difference.



It seems that many in the South not only do not want unification, but they don't even want to allow refugees from the North to get aid. 57.6% responded as being apathetic to North Koreans and an astounding (to me, anyway) 19.2% said that North Koreans are like foreigners.




For unification to happen, it's going to take a lot longer, and a lot more work.

[anarcho-communist4]

Lets all calm down, im confused as to why any of us would support any empire/state/country let alone NK? Being communists(of some sort) shouldn't we be thinking of the well being of the proletariat of NK? :confused:

[Yazman]

Lets all calm down, im confused as to why any of us would support any empire/state/country let alone NK? Being communists(of some sort) shouldn't we be thinking of the well being of the proletariat of NK? :confused:

I agree. It is the people we should be concerned with, and the current despotism certainly isn't in their best interests. Capitalism may not be either, however that doesn't mean protecting the current system.

[anarcho-communist4]

I agree. It is the people we should be concerned with, and the current despotism certainly isn't in their best interests. Capitalism may not be either, however that doesn't mean protecting the current system.

I get all of the arguing about tendencies "my communism is better then your communism" (no matter how annoying it is, but its the purpose of this website) But we should not take this, well NK does X and SK does Y, and X isn't as bad as Y so X is okay? Either way no support should be shown to either of those countries (let alone ANY) but support should be shown to the proletariat of said countries.

[rundontwalk]

I think the cost of reunification would be offset by the US/Europe pouring money in as some sort of Korean Marshall Plan. South Korea wouldn't have to bear the cost alone.

[Yazman]

I get all of the arguing about tendencies "my communism is better then your communism" (no matter how annoying it is, but its the purpose of this website) But we should not take this, well NK does X and SK does Y, and X isn't as bad as Y so X is okay? Either way no support should be shown to either of those countries (let alone ANY) but support should be shown to the proletariat of said countries.

Exactly! It's the people we should be concerned with and not necessarily the body governing them.

[Yazman]

I think the cost of reunification would be offset by the US/Europe pouring money in as some sort of Korean Marshall Plan. South Korea wouldn't have to bear the cost alone.

That's possible, but how much can the US really afford to pour in given their current economic situation? No doubt they would just borrow more, of course.

[Rooster]

It's not an imperialist country,is it?

Imperialism isn't about countries, it's a state of capitalism and it's not anti-imperialist by your definition either seeing how it allows for the exploitation of the workers that live there by foreign capital. Capital is international and allowing one set of capitalists to exploit workers in your own backyard affects workers and capital everywhere.

[piet11111]

I think the cost of reunification would be offset by the US/Europe pouring money in as some sort of Korean Marshall Plan. South Korea wouldn't have to bear the cost alone.

What money ?

It seems more likely that the USA will be in need of a Marshall plan by the time a reunification starts seeming likely.

[m1omfg]

I doubt it would do any sort of favour to the South, though. Eastern Germany still isn't over reunification, and the divide between the Germanies was nowhere near as massive as it is between the Koreas. In fact, I've seen reports of polls that say most people in the South couldn't care less about unification anymore.

I am not advocating against unification, just saying that if it occurs anything like Germany's (immediate annexation of the East) it would be absolutely disastrous for the South, and would probably drag down the standard of living for many workers.

There's a big difference between the GDR and DPRK - in East Germany people ate more meat than in West Germany while in the DPRK people are forced to eat wild plants to live. The welfare system in GDR was one of the best in the world. It should be said through that DPRK had no food problems until USSR collapsed and stopped selling oil to them at 1/10 the market price.

The "reunification" of GDR was an anschluss, the reunification of DPRK would be progressive.

[m1omfg]

But the DPRK's deformities, including the prevalence of a nationalist ideological basis similar to that of Ceaucescu, rather go back to the very formation of the state and the Korean war, and cannot be said to be the result of time; those corruptions were there when it came to be (though they have worsened). Kim Il-Sung was hardly a robust communist ideologically.

Yes, but back then, the nation had a secure food supply.

[m1omfg]

And the reunification of Germany did lower West Germany standarts only slighly, but ex-GDR standards lowered immensely. Stop putting all "evil stalinist" countries in one bag.

[thefinalmarch]

Stop with your bullshit name calling to. You're just trying to de-legitimize their point by calling them "stalinists". That's childish name calling.
'Stalinism' is a perfectly acceptable synonym for 'Marxism-Leninism', which is a term that cannot be taken at face-value, but rather needs to be in historical context as an ideology of Stalin's which developed somewhat over time.

I use the term 'Stalinism' simply to de-mystify the relation between Marxism-Leninism and Lenin. I don't use it with the intent of hurting MLs' feelings or whatever.

[DarkPast]

*Need to have one.

I agree- North Korea isn't a bourgeois state- the conditions of capitalism never existed there, and with the Kim Dynasty redefining the term 'Hermit Kingdom', I daresay they never have. North Korea is the feudal fiefdom of the Kim family and their functionaries. They only use vaguely socialist rhetoric in foreign propaganda, relying on petty nationalism and hero-worship domestically. I've watched videos from the KFA that show how shit Pyongyang is, let alone the rest of the country. A south-oriented reunification would do the working class of the North a major favour, since it would remove the national conflict that just gets in the way of the class struggle. Not to mention get some food in their bellies. Subaru's CEO would rather have operational assembly line workers than the undying worship of dying peasants.

A South-oriented reunification would result in most of the North Korea's working class becoming uncompetitive on the job market. Many of them would probably end up as an underclass working in Chinese sweatshops.

It would be far worse than what happened in Eastern Europe, since those countries began to shift towards a market economy long before the fall of the East Bloc. The North Korean people, on the other hand, have practically no experience with the "free" market model. (Oh, and remember how the pyramid schemes in late 90's Albania cheated hundreds of thousands of people out of their money? Something like that, but a lot worse, would likely happen in DPRK, too)

[Smyg]

I'd personally call North Korea feudal, rather than capitalist. :rolleyes:

[thefinalmarch]

North Korea is the feudal fiefdom of the Kim family and their functionaries.

I'd personally call North Korea feudal, rather than capitalist. :rolleyes:
Alright so basically none of you know what feudalism is.

[ZeroNowhere]

What a shit argument. You're the same as the idiots who say "YA LYK SOCIALISM SO MUCH Y DON'T TA MOVE 2 LYK CHINA BRO?!!!1!?11???"
Firstly, the user probably doesn't consider China to be socialism, whereas it is clear that some people do in fact view North Korea as anti-imperialist. Secondly, if you're essentially declaring to the working class of a country that they ought to fight for the sake of their state, one would assume that it would be common courtesy to help out somewhat. It's not like they couldn't do with some help if a war actually begins.


Stop with your bullshit name calling to. You're just trying to de-legitimize their point by calling them "stalinists". That's childish name calling.
I've never had a child call me a 'Stalinist', actually.

[Lucretia]

It's amazing to me that anybody would still consider NK a "deformed workers' state" or communist.

Not even the government of North Korea claims this nowadays. They've removed all mention of Marxism or socialism in their governing documents. They're dyed-in-the-wool nationalists who believe that the good of the nation is secured through obedience to the "great leader," who (because he is so great) must control the means of production every bit as much as he must control the state.

I suppose that means it's a socialist or a workers' state, though, since the state owns the means of production. :rolleyes:

[Allende]

NK government does not represent it's workers views or interests and creates 'hero worship' to keep power.

This is not communism or socialism. It is simply repression


---
I am here: http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=51.483961,-3.196891

[Leftsolidarity]

Firstly, the user probably doesn't consider China to be socialism, whereas it is clear that some people do in fact view North Korea as anti-imperialist. Secondly, if you're essentially declaring to the working class of a country that they ought to fight for the sake of their state, one would assume that it would be common courtesy to help out somewhat. It's not like they couldn't do with some help if a war actually begins.


I didn't say he considered China to be socialist but I was saying that he's point was as stupid as those people who say that. Wow, I didn't think that would need an explanation.
When did I say that? I don't recall saying anything of that nature. I was talking about how I didn't think there is a class of capitalists in the DPRK.


I've never had a child call me a 'Stalinist', actually.

Funny guy...

[TheGodlessUtopian]

I know it is probably a lost cause at this point but I am in favor of the Korean working class rising up and establishing their own state/rule.

[Sinister Cultural Marxist]

I'd personally call North Korea feudal, rather than capitalist. :rolleyes:


Alright so basically none of you know what feudalism is.


It's amazing to me that anybody would still consider NK a "deformed workers' state" or communist.

Not even the government of North Korea claims this nowadays. They've removed all mention of Marxism or socialism in their governing documents. They're dyed-in-the-wool nationalists who believe that the good of the nation is secured through obedience to the "great leader," who (because he is so great) must control the means of production every bit as much as he must control the state.

I suppose that means it's a socialist or a workers' state, though, since the state owns the means of production. :rolleyes:


NK government does not represent it's workers views or interests and creates 'hero worship' to keep power.

This is not communism or socialism. It is simply repression



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Despotism



Despotism is a form of government (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Form_of_government) in which a single entity rules with absolute power. That entity may be an individual, as in an autocracy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autocracy), or it may be a group, as in an oligarchy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oligarchy). The word despotism means to "rule in the fashion of a despot" and does not necessarily require a singular "despot", an individual.
Despot comes from the Greek despotes (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Despotes), which roughly means "master" or "one with power", and it has been used to translate a wide variety of titles and positions. It was used to describe the unlimited power and authority of the Pharaohs (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pharaoh) of Egypt, employed in the Byzantine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byzantine) court as a title of nobility, used by the rulers of Byzantine vassal states, and adopted as a title of the Byzantine Emperors. Thus, despot is found to have different meanings and interpretations at various times in history and can not be described by a single definition. This is similar to the other Greek titles basileus (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basileus) and autokrator (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autokrator), which, along with despot, have been used at various times to describe everything from a local chieftain to a simple ruler, king or emperor.
Colloquially, despot has been applied pejoratively to a person, particularity a head of state or government, who abuses his power and authority to oppress his people, subjects or subordinates. In this sense, it is similar to the pejorative connotations that have likewise arisen with the term tyrant (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyrant). Dictator has also developed nearly similar pejorative connotations, though despot and tyrant tend to stress cruelty and even enjoyment therefrom, while dictator tends to imply more harshness or unfair implementation of law.If we take Marx's notion on Despotism (abandoning his use of orientalist discourse but utilizing how he describes their economic model ... Romania had a similar form of government so it's not at all unique to Asia):




Marxist ontology

Oriental Despotism is the quality ascribed by Karl Marx (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Marx) to large cities of the Middle East (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Middle_East) and Asia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asia), which would not have been truly independent, mainly due to their geographical location.
The premise is that there existed some forms of state, which were ruled by tribute (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tribute)-collecting despots (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Despotism) based on the system of production-property relations (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relations_of_production), described as "Asiatic mode of production (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asiatic_mode_of_production)". Oriental despotism is, thus, the political superstructure (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superstructure) that was developed in succession. It was explained to have prevented states from progressing, or, as Marx said, "Asia fell asleep in history". Dynasties (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynasty) might have changed, but overall the structure of the state remained the same - until an outside force (i.e. Western powers (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_world)) artificially enforces "progressive (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressivism)" reforms.
Within such socio-economic formations, the most obvious of which being the agrarian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agriculture)-based empires of Ancient Egypt (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Egypt) and China (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China), an absolute ruler farmed out the right to collect tribute from peasant villagers to a hierarchy of provincial petty officials (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Official), who also had responsibility for organizing the construction and maintenance of extensive irrigation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irrigation) works, upon which agricultural production was dependent. Extorting tribute from village communities became the universal mode of enrichment by the ruling class (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruling_class) of military-priestly nobles (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobility). The divine kings also wasted resources on useless monument-building.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oriental_despotism



http://cdn1.beeffco.com/files/poll-images/normal/kim-il-sung_3446.jpg


(look at how they bow before a statue of a dead man like Catholics at the shrine of a saint or Buddhists before a Bodhisattva ... or the eunuchs before the Emperor)



Elements of the structure are superficially different, although there are often deeper similarities. Instead of tribute there's a network of patronage and bribery, but it functions more or less in the same way. The excessive cult of personality, the absolute hegemony of the head of state, the slavish bureaucracy.


It's not feudalism because the local elites are not independent power centers, and it's not entirely capitalist because access to wealth is based on political connections not ownership over the means of production nor does the government allocate wealth in such a way as to generate growth (ie the DPRK is really bad at generating new "Capital"), all of which is instead essentially managed by the higher elite. There is some kind of weak bourgeoisie there ... the yes-men, sycophants and the slavish bureaucrats, but their power and influence is dependent on the survival of the real power in North Korea-the military and the political elite around the Kims, ie the despotic oligarchy.

[Lucretia]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Despotism



If we take Marx's notion on Despotism (abandoning his use of orientalist discourse but utilizing how he describes their economic model ... Romania had a similar form of government so it's not at all unique to Asia):



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oriental_despotism



http://cdn1.beeffco.com/files/poll-images/normal/kim-il-sung_3446.jpg


(look at how they bow before a statue of a dead man like Catholics at the shrine of a saint or Buddhists before a Bodhisattva ... or the eunuchs before the Emperor)



Elements of the structure are superficially different, although there are often deeper similarities. Instead of tribute there's a network of patronage and bribery, but it functions more or less in the same way. The excessive cult of personality, the absolute hegemony of the head of state, the slavish bureaucracy.


It's not feudalism because the local elites are not independent power centers, and it's not bourgeois because access to wealth is based on political connections not ownership over the means of production, all of which is instead essentially owned by the elite. There is some kind of weak bourgeoisie there ... the yes-men, sycophants and elite bureaucrats, but their power and influence is dependent on the survival of the real power in North Korea-the military and the political elite around the Kims, ie the despotic oligarchy.

Despotism, "oriental" or otherwise, is not and has not historically been a mode of production. These issues are pretty compellingly discussed in the book The State and the Tributary Mode of Production.

North Korea is despotic all right, though.

[Weezer]

http://i781.photobucket.com/albums/yy96/dattoaster/168127_1817649680536_1218941355_32127044_7516252_n .png

[khad]

In Utero, I know you're adjusting with your return to revleft and all, but please keep these image macros out of the serious forums. There's chit chat for that.

You can consider this a verbal warning.

[Burkland]

Blame DPRK, it is revisionist and totalitarian because the US says so :laugh:

[Bronco]

Blame DPRK, it is revisionist and totalitarian because the US says so :laugh:

So you would argue that the DPRK isn't totalitarian? :blink: Don't see why the US would use Marxist terminology like "revisionist" to try and slander them either

[Metacomet]

So you would argue that the DPRK isn't totalitarian? :blink: Don't see why the US would use Marxist terminology like "revisionist" to try and slander them either

That's American/South Korean/Japanese propaganda.

[OHumanista]

Sure, reality is a western propaganda don't you all guys know? You're being tricked! We must live on the communist fairy land, where the DPRK is democratic, socialist, free and humane(if you see evidence of the contrary ignore it, it's all evil cappie propaganda). In fact I bet they're almost achieving full fledged communism right now and are close to abolishing the state and money.

[Tim Cornelis]

What if the working class seized power, controlled the means of production, and distributed earnings through wages? Would that make the working class the capitalist class? I don't think so.

That's not wage labour. I think it's rather disturbing that a socialist would think wage labour = working for a wage. It's not.

Wage labour = selling your labour power to an employer. Hence, the North Korean state--using Engels' definition--is capitalist because it employs wage labour.

If workers distribute earnings through wages there is no wage labour, because the workers are not selling their labour power to an employer.


Look, the DPRK is not perfect

That's a bit of an understatement don't you think. It's literally the most horrible place on this earth at this moment. In fact, it's worse than any regime, come to think of it. It's literally the most horrible place on this earth ever.


I agree. It is the people we should be concerned with, and the current despotism certainly isn't in their best interests. Capitalism may not be either, however that doesn't mean protecting the current system.

If we compare South Korea's private capitalism with North Korea's state-capitalism and assume that North Korea would adopt a similar system of private capitalism, it would definitely be better. North Korea cannot get any worse, can it?

North Korea is so reactionary and backward, imperialism would actually be progressive!

[seyret35]

this is important!

[piet11111]

How you people manage to turn every North Korea discussion into a huge tendency war is beyond me.

We practice this at least twice a month.

[Os Cangaceiros]

That's a bit of an understatement don't you think. It's literally the most horrible place on this earth at this moment. In fact, it's worse than any regime, come to think of it. It's literally the most horrible place on this earth ever.

:lol: that's quite a statement!

[Yazman]

That's not wage labour. I think it's rather disturbing that a socialist would think wage labour = working for a wage. It's not.

Wage labour = selling your labour power to an employer. Hence, the North Korean state--using Engels' definition--is capitalist because it employs wage labour.

If workers distribute earnings through wages there is no wage labour, because the workers are not selling their labour power to an employer.



That's a bit of an understatement don't you think. It's literally the most horrible place on this earth at this moment. In fact, it's worse than any regime, come to think of it. It's literally the most horrible place on this earth ever.



If we compare South Korea's private capitalism with North Korea's state-capitalism and assume that North Korea would adopt a similar system of private capitalism, it would definitely be better. North Korea cannot get any worse, can it?

North Korea is so reactionary and backward, imperialism would actually be progressive!

I do actually think at this point, in the year of 2011, that capitalism would be progressive for North Korea. There seems to be more political will than actual popular support for unification in the South though as I've posted, so perhaps an independent North Korean revolution in their own state might be more worthwhile.

This is all just musing though.

[thefinalmarch]

That's a bit of an understatement don't you think. It's literally the most horrible place on this earth at this moment. In fact, it's worse than any regime, come to think of it. It's literally the most horrible place on this earth ever.
I don't know about that. Most North Koreans have some form of housing, education, and healthcare at the least, and many North Koreans are adequately nourished, but travel to somewhere like the severely famine- and drought-stricken Horn of Africa atm, and you'll probably retract that statement.

[Smyg]

There are, and have been, way, way worse places. I'm guessing a North Korean concentration camp is preferable to a Nazi Germany concentration camp. :rolleyes:

[robbo203]

There's imperialism and anti-imperialism.
Communists should be on the side of North Korea,despite its flaws.


Imperialist state capitalist China is financially supporting and investing in the state capitalist dictatorship of North Korea to a very significant extent. Doesnt that tell you something? This is not a struggle between "imperialism" and "anti-imperialism "- only gullible fools would fall for that sort of ideological crap - it is struggle between one capitalist state and another over territory. Plain and simple.

No revolutionary socialist worth their salt would side with one or other. Quite simply , socialists dont support any nation states - these are merely capitalist constructs - and still less do we put out lives on the line for the cause of a nation state, whatever its hue, or urge that others do so. Besides, every nation state is latently or manifestly imperialist, including both North and South Korea, because the very nature of capital itself as a social force is to expand beyond any artificial territorial limit.

In the case of North Korea it has been actively soliciting external investment , making it known that it has an eminently pliable workforce that foreign capitalists are most welcome to exploit - notably, in its special economic zones - so it can hardly be presented as some kind of resolute opponent of "imperialism"

[Tim Cornelis]

I don't know about that. Most North Koreans have some form of housing, education, and healthcare at the least, and many North Koreans are adequately nourished, but travel to somewhere like the severely famine- and drought-stricken Horn of Africa atm, and you'll probably retract that statement.

Everything you said is questionable, but the bolded part is utter nonsense. Since the North Korean famine of the 1990s there has been a continual and chronic food shortage, starvation and malnourishment is widespread (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Korean_famine#Current_status).


but travel to somewhere like the severely famine- and drought-stricken Horn of Africa atm, and you'll probably retract that statement.

I don't know, perhaps. But let me rephrase: North Korea is the most horrible place--ever--in regards to state induced misery, and possibly the worst place ever.


There are, and have been, way, way worse places. I'm guessing a North Korean concentration camp is preferable to a Nazi Germany concentration camp. :rolleyes:

I very much doubt so. Even if that's partially true it wouldn't b "way, way worse", it would be "somewhat slightly worse".

One former North Korean prison guard stated the following "In nazi death camps they specialised in killing people as fast as possible, in out concentration camps we specialised in killing people as slowly as possible".

l1oUd89QvGo
ecZKGN_0uHc

[Threetune]

http://www.cnn.com/2011/11/24/world/asia/north-korea-sea-of-fire/index.html?hpt=hp_t3

North Korea's military supreme command denounced the South's anniversary exercise as a rehearsal for war against the North and warned that the North's armed forces are ready for

"a decisive battle to counter any military provocation," Yonhap reported.

“If South Korea dares "to impair the dignity of (the North) again and fire one bullet or shell toward its inviolable territorial waters, sky and land, the deluge of fire on Yonphyong Island will lead to that in Chongwadae and the sea of fire in Chongwadae to the deluge of fire sweeping away the stronghold of the group of traitors,"

the command said in an official (North) Korean Central News Agency account, according to Yonhap.

What is wrong with this? Does anyone here support the US and South Korea constantly organizing military ‘exercises’ (provocations) around the coast of the North?

[thefinalmarch]

Everything you said is questionable
Not really. Healthcare is something of a mess and there are conflicting reports regarding the state of it, but education and housing are perfectly fine.

Education in North Korea is free of charge,[179] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Korea#cite_note-178) compulsory until the secondary level, and is controlled by the government. The state also used to provide school uniforms free of charge until the early 1990s.[180] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Korea#cite_note-179) Heuristics (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heuristics) is actively applied in order to develop the independence and creativity of students.[181] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Korea#cite_note-180) Compulsory education lasts eleven years, and encompasses one year of preschool (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preschool), four years of primary education (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primary_education) and six years of secondary education (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secondary_education). The school curriculum has both academic and political content.[182] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Korea#cite_note-181)
Primary schools are known as people's schools, and children attend them from the age of 6 to 9. Then from age 10 to 16, they attend either a regular secondary school or a special secondary school, depending on their specialties.
Higher education (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Higher_education) is not compulsory in North Korea. It is composed of two systems: academic higher education and higher education for continuing education. The academic higher education system includes three kinds of institutions: universities (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University), professional schools (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Professional_school_%28disambiguation%29), and technical schools (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technical_school). Graduate schools (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graduate_school) for master's (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Master%27s_degree) and doctoral (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PhD) level studies are attached to universities, and are for students who want to continue their education. Two notable universities in the DPRK are the Kim Il-sung University (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kim_Il-sung_University) and Pyongyang University of Science and Technology (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pyongyang_University_of_Science_and_Technology), both in Pyongyang (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pyongyang). The former, founded in October 1946, is an elite institution whose enrollment of 16,000 full- and part-time students in the early 1990s occupies, in the words of one observer, the "pinnacle of the North Korean educational and social system."[183] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Korea#cite_note-182)
North Korea is one of the most literate countries in the world, with an average literacy rate of 99%.[5] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Korea#cite_note-cia-kn-4)


There is no mention of any sort of housing crisis in the DPRK either.


but the bolded part is utter nonsense. Since the North Korean famine of the 1990s there has been a continual and chronic food shortage, starvation and malnourishment is widespread (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Korean_famine#Current_status).

"Many North Koreans are adequately nourished" does not mean "all North Koreans are adequately nourished". I'm perfectly aware of the famine and the problems it still brings to the North today, but you're trying to make it sound as if the DPRK is populated by millions of starved and dying orphans or something. Food access is far from perfect, but large sections/most of the population is still adequately nourished.

Then again, this is not about whether or not NK is an ideal place to live. This was about whether or not NK was the epitome of misery, poverty and death, which of course it isn't. I'm not one to "defend" or "support" the North at all, but there are in fact plenty of worse places to live.

[Tim Cornelis]

Not really. Healthcare is something of a mess and there are conflicting reports regarding the state of it, but education and housing are perfectly fine.

"Heating systems in the apartments and urban water supplies are inadequate" (http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/322222/North-Korea/280876/Housing)



"Many North Koreans are adequately nourished" does not mean "all North Koreans are adequately nourished". I'm perfectly aware of the famine and the problems it still brings to the North today, but you're trying to make it sound as if the DPRK is populated by millions of starved and dying orphans or something.

Uhm yeah.
Footage shot inside North Korea has revealed that the country could be on the verge of a famine, showing filthy, homeless and orphaned children begging for scraps and soldiers stealing food from rice sellers. (source (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/blogpost/post/north-korean-could-be-on-verge-of-famine-smuggled-video-shows/2011/06/27/AG1ReVnH_blog.html))

and:


In one account, a male guard who could not bear his hunger killed his colleague using an ax, ate some of the human flesh and sold the remainder in the market by disguising it as mutton

(source (http://www.globalpost.com/dispatches/globalpost-blogs/the-rice-bowl/cannibalism-north-korea-world-hunger))


Food access is far from perfect, but large sections/most of the population is still adequately nourished.

Naha. The official North Korean policy is "Military First" (Songun (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Songun)), this means food supplies are delivered first to the military, but even in 2011 famine is affecting the military! Allow me to quote:


The army, too, is starting to go hungry, with one soldier saying that he estimates half of of the soldiers are malnourished. The state no longer has any rations to give them. (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/blogpost/post/north-korean-could-be-on-verge-of-famine-smuggled-video-shows/2011/06/27/AG1ReVnH_blog.html)

If even the military, who is priority, is going hungry imagine the hunger of ordinary citizens and even worse: those at labour camps who live of rats they find during hard labour time. Indeed, North Koreans are eating each other (http://www.globalpost.com/dispatches/globalpost-blogs/the-rice-bowl/cannibalism-north-korea-world-hunger).

The only people "adequately" nourished in NK is the 'nomenklatura', Kim Jong Il's caste and military leadership.

Even six years after the North Korean famine occured, cannibalism was still widely reported (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/northkorea/1432366/Famine-struck-N-Koreans-eating-children.html). And today, there are still reports of cannibalism (source (http://asiancorrespondent.com/58290/more-reports-of-cannabalism-in-north-korea))

Nowadays, North Korean's foot rationing are cut ("Aid agencies report that government food rations for some have been cut to just 200g a day - barely one tenth (!) of what is needed"), and in NK "You see more and more people pulling out roots, grass and other edible plants. Or they cut down trees and try to grow corn or potatoes in their place (http://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/politics/foreign_affairs/Famine_threatens_to_return_to_North_Korea.html?cid =30572042).

Famine in 2011 in North Korea (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/northkorea/8641946/North-Korea-faces-famine-Tell-the-world-we-are-starving.html) is definitely worse than the famine in the horn of Africa, this is evidenced by the fact that in North Korea 6,000,000 are at risk (http://www.wsws.org/articles/2011/oct2011/kore-o15.shtml), while in Horn of Africa this number is 3,500,000 (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/now-kenya-stands-on-brink-of-its-own-famine-2328372.html), almost 50% lower than in North Korea.


Then again, this is not about whether or not NK is an ideal place to live. This was about whether or not NK was the epitome of misery, poverty and death, which of course it isn't. I'm not one to "defend" or "support" the North at all, but there are in fact plenty of worse places to live.

Now, I showed you the facts (feel free to click any source I provided) that North Korean famine in 2011 is worse than the famine in the Horn of Africa in terms of scale. They may have "good" housing without adequate water supply or heating, and a fine education but that doesn't really matter if you're starving, or you're send to a labour camp because of a "crime" your family member did.

So, what place is worse than North Korea? I say: none!

[Lucretia]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Despotism


If we take Marx's notion on Despotism (abandoning his use of orientalist discourse but utilizing how he describes their economic model ... Romania had a similar form of government so it's not at all unique to Asia):


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oriental_despotism



http://cdn1.beeffco.com/files/poll-images/normal/kim-il-sung_3446.jpg


(look at how they bow before a statue of a dead man like Catholics at the shrine of a saint or Buddhists before a Bodhisattva ... or the eunuchs before the Emperor)



Elements of the structure are superficially different, although there are often deeper similarities. Instead of tribute there's a network of patronage and bribery, but it functions more or less in the same way. The excessive cult of personality, the absolute hegemony of the head of state, the slavish bureaucracy.


It's not feudalism because the local elites are not independent power centers, and it's not entirely capitalist because access to wealth is based on political connections not ownership over the means of production nor does the government allocate wealth in such a way as to generate growth (ie the DPRK is really bad at generating new "Capital"), all of which is instead essentially managed by the higher elite. There is some kind of weak bourgeoisie there ... the yes-men, sycophants and the slavish bureaucrats, but their power and influence is dependent on the survival of the real power in North Korea-the military and the political elite around the Kims, ie the despotic oligarchy.

The more I look at this picture, the more I keep imagining the likeness of Bob Avakian on the statue.