Log in

View Full Version : What does Kim Jong Il's death mean for imperialism?



Alexenator
20th December 2011, 04:45
What does this mean for global (esp. US) imperialism, now that North Korea's leader is dead?

ComradeGrant
20th December 2011, 05:54
I'm going to go with nothing. I think the only difference now will be the name of the dictator. I'm not quite sure on Kim Jong-Un or his position on things, but I don't think he'll be too different from his father.

Agent Ducky
20th December 2011, 05:58
I'm going to go with nothing. I think the only difference now will be the name of the dictator. I'm not quite sure on Kim Jong-Un or his position on things, but I don't think he'll be too different from his father.
Yeah, I think they brainwashed him pretty well and he'll uphold the family legacy just fine.

TheGodlessUtopian
20th December 2011, 06:14
Literally nothing...saber rattling, but nothing new.

o well this is ok I guess
20th December 2011, 06:46
A resurgence of glorious juche ideology among the oppressed peoples of asia

#FF0000
20th December 2011, 06:55
i can't wait for the us to invade n. korea so they can literally just nuke seoul before being crushed leaving the world without one of its major economic hubs while having to deal with integrating this peasant society more completely into global capitalism.

yeah it really doesn't mean anything.

Ostrinski
20th December 2011, 07:02
What does Christopher Hitchens' death mean for Christianity?

cb9's_unity
20th December 2011, 07:08
If China had pulled out its support for NK things might be different. All the big players are still on the same ground though.