Is North Korea a mix of Fascism and Communism?

[mr.red]

I heard somewhere that it was.

[Lokomotive293]

I have to admit I'm not quite sure what exactly North Korea is, but there's no such thing as a "mix of fascism and communism".

[TheGodlessUtopian]

The short answer is no, it is not; the two are incompatible.

[l'Enfermé]

North Korea is much more fucked up than 20th century communism or fascism.

[Ostrinski]

There is nothing fascist nor communist about North Korea. North Korea is a dynastic government of a state capitalist economy and of an intensely authoritarian nature.

Communism describes a global post-scarcity society without classes, nations, money, or states run voluntarily by free producers that are not alienated from the means of production and by extension the product of their labor. Fascism is a bizarre right-wing political ideology of palingenetic nationalism.

[Anarcho-Brocialist]

I don't believe so, albeit a very despotic authoritarian regime rules over N. Korea.

[human strike]

There is nothing fascist nor communist about North Korea. North Korea is a dynastic government of a state capitalist economy and of an intensely authoritarian nature.

Communism describes a global post-scarcity society without classes, nations, money, or states run voluntarily by free producers that are not alienated from the means of production and by extension the product of their labor. Fascism is a bizarre right-wing political ideology of palingenetic nationalism.

Why do you call fascism 'bizarre'?

[Eleutheromaniac]

I'd consider it a theocratic authoritarian dictatorship.

[Lokomotive293]

Fascism is a bizarre right-wing political ideology of palingenetic nationalism.

Fascism is the open dictatorship of the most reactionary elements of capital, to be precise.

[Leftsolidarity]

No, it's not Fascist nor Communist.

Other than that you won't get an exact answer from anyone here because different groups hold different positions.

I, and many other Marxist-Leninists, hold the position that it is a workers' state even though it has contradictions and deformities. We support it on that basis and on the basis of anti-imperialism.

You get others, whom you've seen some of the answers, that say it is state-capitalist, neo-feudalist (lol), and other odd descriptions that I don't know nor care about because I just find them stupid and un-Marxist.

Enjoy this thread because it's probably going to turn into a shit storm.

[Yuppie Grinder]

North Korea is State-Capitalist. I wouldn't call it fascist at all. Fascism is a different sort of historical situation then Stalinism.

[Yuppie Grinder]

Anti-imps who support the DPRK will uphold anything with a red flag.

[Let's Get Free]

Kim Il Sung's Juche is leaning heavily towards Third Positionist ideologies, with its adoration of the military, disregard for class politics and fierce nationalism/racialism, and therefore has absolutely 0 to do with communism and could hardly be considered even a part of the Stalinist tradition. It might be said that Juche represents a final step in the general process of ideological degeneration of the Third World nationalist doctrines, as it obviously lacks even the traces of rationalist discourse left in other such ideologies.

[Leftsolidarity]

Kim Il Sung's Juche is leaning heavily towards Third Positionist ideologies, with its adoration of the military, disregard for class politics and fierce nationalism/racialism, and therefore has absolutely 0 to do with communism and could hardly be considered even a part of the Stalinist tradition. It might be said that Juche represents a final step in the general process of ideological degeneration of the Third World nationalist doctrines, as it obviously lacks even the traces of rationalist discourse left in other such ideologies.

Have you ever read anything from Kim Il Sung on what Juche actually is by the way?

It's a focus on internal issues of an oppressed nation trying to build socialism.

[Let's Get Free]

Have you ever read anything from Kim Il Sung on what Juche actually is by the way?

It's a focus on internal issues of an oppressed nation trying to build socialism.

And you believe that? They don't even use socialist rhetoric anymore. In fact, they boast openly to their foreign investors (mainly China) about how dirt cheap their labor is.

[Leftsolidarity]

And you believe that? They don't even use socialist rhetoric anymore. In fact, they boast openly to their foreign investors (mainly China) about how dirt cheap their labor is.

You're jumping from what Juche is to their modern day contradictions which don't come from the Juche line.

I'm not saying I'm the expert on Juche nor the DPRK in general. I'm saying that a lot of people love to talk out their ass on them when they really don't even know they foundations.

[Homo Songun]

Well, have you read anything by Kim il Sung, Gladiator?

[sixdollarchampagne]

No, it's not Fascist nor Communist.

Other than that you won't get an exact answer from anyone here because different groups hold different positions.

I, and many other Marxist-Leninists, hold the position that it is a workers' state even though it has contradictions and deformities. We support it on that basis and on the basis of anti-imperialism... .

Wow! Periodic famines are quite a "deformity," to say the least! My favorite position about the Korean "People's Democratic Republic" is that of those who maintain that it is incumbent on socialists to defend the North Korean rule-by-famine state, in order to "preserve the gains of the revolution." When ordinary people are massively dropping dead in the streets from starvation, as in North Korea, (and you can see the videos of that on youtube), then, I think, it is a hallucination to talk about "gains of the revolution."

I hasten to add that I would oppose any US attack on any foreign country.

[Red Banana]

Is North Korea Fascist though? It has the nationalism, the merger of state and capital, the despotic dictator, etc.

I don't pretend to be an expert on either North Korea or Fascism but I can't really tell the difference between what North Korea does and Fascism, it's always puzzled me.

If someone could explain the difference that would be really helpful.

[Let's Get Free]

Well, have you read anything by Kim il Sung, Gladiator?

You don't need to read anything to see that North Korea is a viciously anti-working class ferociously reactionary absolute monarchy.

[Homo Songun]

The DPRK is one of the main bulwarks against fascism in the world today. If it seems militaristic to newbie leftists, that's because, it is like, you know, been continuously at war with the most powerful military in the history of the world for the last 60 years or so.


You don't need to read anything to see that North Korea is a viciously anti-working class ferociously reactionary absolute monarchy.

LOL I rest my case.

[Lokomotive293]

Is North Korea Fascist though? It has the nationalism, the merger of state and capital, the despotic dictator, etc.

I don't pretend to be an expert on either North Korea or Fascism but I can't really tell the difference between what North Korea does and Fascism, it's always puzzled me.

If someone could explain the difference that would be really helpful.

It helps to look at what fascism is. Fascism is the reaction of an Imperialist state to a crisis it can't solve otherwise. That crisis can either affect the Imperialist state directly, i.e. happen in the Imperialist country itself, in which case we will see a mass movement based on ultra-nationalist ideology and social demagogy take power, destroy bourgeois democracy, and set up a terrorist dictatorship aimed primarily at the destruction of the labor movement and the rapid and thorough militarization of society in order to prepare an aggressive war. The textbook example would be Germany, 1933-1945.
Or it can affect the Imperialist state indirectly, i.e. happen in one of its colonies. In that case, we will most likely see a military coup, supported by the Imperialist state, resulting in the same as above. Textbook example is Chile under Pinochet.
In any case, fascism is always the open, terrorist dictatorship of the most reactionary, most chauvinistic and most imperialist elements of monopoly capital. No matter what North Korea is, fascism is something else entirely.

[Os Cangaceiros]

It seems to me that North Korea just combines some nominally left-wing talking points w/ Korean nationalism. IMO this by itself doesn't = fascism.

[Leftsolidarity]

Wow! Periodic famines are quite a "deformity," to say the least! My favorite position about the Korean "People's Democratic Republic" is that of those who maintain that it is incumbent on socialists to defend the North Korean rule-by-famine state, in order to "preserve the gains of the revolution." When ordinary people are massively dropping dead in the streets from starvation, as in North Korea, (and you can see the videos of that on youtube), then, I think, it is a hallucination to talk about "gains of the revolution."

I hasten to add that I would oppose any US attack on any foreign country.

I'm sorry, were you trying to make some sort of argument in that post? So you're saying that the DPRK's leaders "rules by famine"? Yes, how silly I have been to think that these famines could be the product of a bad climate, low resources, a never ending war that's imposed on them, and some mismanagement along with many other things. It's so clear now that the leadership does this on purpose to pursue their quest for absolute power! :rolleyes:

Are you sure you're not a right-wing conservative because you mixed up the usual leftist anti-DPRK talking points with theirs.

[Leftsolidarity]

You don't need to read anything to see that North Korea is a viciously anti-working class ferociously reactionary absolute monarchy.

Well actually you would have to read something to see that because I have a feeling you've never been to the DPRK so that really depends on what you're reading. The Washington Post? The New York Times?

And yeah, if you're going to try to talk about a particular theory and why you like it/dislike it. You really should read the original content at least a little.

[Red Banana]

It helps to look at what fascism is. Fascism is the reaction of an Imperialist state to a crisis it can't solve otherwise. That crisis can either affect the Imperialist state directly, i.e. happen in the Imperialist country itself, in which case we will see a mass movement based on ultra-nationalist ideology and social demagogy take power, destroy bourgeois democracy, and set up a terrorist dictatorship aimed primarily at the destruction of the labor movement and the rapid and thorough militarization of society in order to prepare an aggressive war. The textbook example would be Germany, 1933-1945.
Or it can affect the Imperialist state indirectly, i.e. happen in one of its colonies. In that case, we will most likely see a military coup, supported by the Imperialist state, resulting in the same as above. Textbook example is Chile under Pinochet.
In any case, fascism is always the open, terrorist dictatorship of the most reactionary, most chauvinistic and most imperialist elements of monopoly capital. No matter what North Korea is, fascism is something else entirely.

So in each of the two scenarios where it can happen you boil it down to these characteristics:

-Ultra- nationalist mass movement
-A social demagogy takes power
-The destruction of bourgeois democracy
-A terrorist dictatorship aimed at: destroying the labor movement, militarizing society for aggressive war

But doesn't North Korea have those? The Soviet Union supported and in large part created that state in response to the crisis of how Korea will be ruled after WWII, they have the ultra nationalism (no mass movement though), a social demagogy that has taken power (the Kim dynasty), the destruction of bourgeois democracy (never there to destroy in the first place but absent nonetheless), a terrorist dictatorship which has succeeded in destroying their labor movement and militarizing society (though not for aggressive war, kudos).

They just seem way too similar to me to merit any significant differentiation.

[Sea]

The Soviet Union supported and in large part created that state in response to the crisis of how Korea will be ruled after WWII, they have the ultra nationalism (no mass movement though), a social demagogy that has taken power (the Kim dynasty), the destruction of bourgeois democracy (never there to destroy in the first place but absent nonetheless), a terrorist dictatorship which has succeeded in destroying their labor movement and militarizing society (though not for aggressive war, kudos).I'm pretty sure you could say they have the mass nationalist movement. From what I can tell the goal in North Korea is to embed their ideology (which includes nationalism) as a necessary and integral part of everyday society. Fascism doesn't need a mass movement per se as when all of society is part of a mass movement it ceases to be a movement and becomes a feature of everyday life.
You don't need to read anything to see that North Korea is a viciously anti-working class ferociously reactionary absolute monarchy.But research is required to differentiate the hype and propaganda from NATO 'n' friends as well as the blind praise from DPRK sympathizers from what is actually the case though, right?

I'd really hate to live in what is essentially one of China's carbuncles and to come to this conclusion doesn't really require a lot of analysis but trying to figure out the precise nature of Kimville's political and economic life is another story entirely.

That said I doubt we know the whole story at this point, at least not in English and online.

[social191]

North Korea has an anti-revisionist communist government, however other communist countries around the world do not support the North Korean regime because of their nuclear missile strikes and other things. North Korean has a militant-style dictatorship, and I would align the North Korean regime as more fascist than communist mainly for these reasons.

[Lokomotive293]

So in each of the two scenarios where it can happen you boil it down to these characteristics:

-Ultra- nationalist mass movement
-A social demagogy takes power
-The destruction of bourgeois democracy
-A terrorist dictatorship aimed at: destroying the labor movement, militarizing society for aggressive war

But doesn't North Korea have those? The Soviet Union supported and in large part created that state in response to the crisis of how Korea will be ruled after WWII, they have the ultra nationalism (no mass movement though), a social demagogy that has taken power (the Kim dynasty), the destruction of bourgeois democracy (never there to destroy in the first place but absent nonetheless), a terrorist dictatorship which has succeeded in destroying their labor movement and militarizing society (though not for aggressive war, kudos).

They just seem way too similar to me to merit any significant differentiation.

The part about the aggressive war is more important than you think. North Korea is not aggressive, its huge military is purely defensive, and being that the country has been in a constant state of war ever since it existed, its hardly a surprise that it needs such a huge military.
What is also more important than you think is the character of fascism as the open dictatorship of the most reactionary elements of monopoly capital. There is no monopoly capital in North Korea, neither local nor foreign. The USSR was not an Imperialist state, and, anyway, it hasn't existed for 20 years, and North Korea has only really after its end turned into... well, what it is now. Before that, it was pretty much a regular socialist state. What it is now, I don't know, as I said before. It's definitely anti-imperialist, though.
What is meant by "crisis" (sorry for the vague use of the term) is not any crisis, but a crisis that poses a threat to the continued existence of the capitalist mode of production in the particular country.

[Red Enemy]

North Korea, or the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, as the Stalinists and Right wing Trotskyists prefer to call it, is nothing but an autocratic, state capitalist nation. The lower classes face severe poverty, starvation, and mass "Great leader" propaganda and education focused on how "Great Leader" has made NK the best place on Earth. It is in no way, shape, or form a worker's state. It is ruled by the military, and at the top of the military is the mystical and deified "great leader".

On to the idea of a combination of fascism and communism. No, it certainly is not. Fascism is a form of capitalist reaction, which arises from a weakening capitalist class and a strong and class conscious working class. Fascism is still capitalism. This, because it is capitalism, cannot be "mixed" with communism. Communism is the final stage, the stage at which there exists no class, money, state, etc. etc. capitalism has been thrown into the dustbin of history at this point, and the whole world is communist, not one nation, not 5 nations, but the world. You cannot mix capitalism and socialism, nor capitalism and communism.*

I think you should read some of the basics to help with this question in specific, such as:

Wage Labour and Capital by Marx
Socialism: Utopian and Scientific by Engels
The Communist Manifesto by Marx and Engels
Fascism: What it is and how to fight it by Trotsky

Going beyond that, you could read some more difficult works, such as Capital.

*When referring to "socialism", I am referring to the lower phase of communism. Old Leninist habits die hard. Not that it's important, or anything.

If you have any questions about "state capitalism", just ask, I can give you some things to read if you wish.

[Red Banana]

The part about the aggressive war is more important than you think. North Korea is not aggressive, its huge military is purely defensive, and being that the country has been in a constant state of war ever since it existed, its hardly a surprise that it needs such a huge military.
What is also more important than you think is the character of fascism as the open dictatorship of the most reactionary elements of monopoly capital. There is no monopoly capital in North Korea, neither local nor foreign. The USSR was not an Imperialist state, and, anyway, it hasn't existed for 20 years, and North Korea has only really after its end turned into... well, what it is now. Before that, it was pretty much a regular socialist state. What it is now, I don't know, as I said before. It's definitely anti-imperialist, though.
What is meant by "crisis" (sorry for the vague use of the term) is not any crisis, but a crisis that poses a threat to the continued existence of the capitalist mode of production in the particular country.

Yes, it is completely understandable why North Korea is so militarized, but whether or not they are using their military for aggressive war does not fundamentally change the domestic nature of their state. For example, Hitler didn't engage in aggressive war the whole time he was in power, but he was still a fascist who implemented fascist policies within Germany for the duration of his time in power

I think our difference in definition comes from an ideological split. I am one to consider the USSR, PRC, DPRK, etc. all to be State Capitalist, so North Korea being "an open dictatorship of the most reactionary parts of capital" sounds about right to me.

That the USSR was an imperialist state is another question for another thread, but I would say that it was.

[Leftsolidarity]

I think our difference in definition comes from an ideological split. I am one to consider the USSR, PRC, DPRK, etc. all to be State Capitalist, so North Korea being "an open dictatorship of the most reactionary parts of capital" sounds about right to me.



Then you must have absolutely no idea what "reactionary" means.

[Ostrinski]

Why do you call fascism 'bizarre'?Personal sentiments I suppose. Although fascism is certainly an interestingly unique historical phenomenon specifically just in terms of how absurdly reactionary it is as well as the very unique societal conditions under which it was able to become a (petite-bourgeois) class movement.

[Ostrinski]

Fascism is the open dictatorship of the most reactionary elements of capital, to be precise.Perhaps. In regard to its historical foundations I would say it was the last line of defense against the working class communist movement in Europe and as such represented something of an ideological codification of the emergency that bourgeois society was facing.

[Fruit of Ulysses]

Calling the DPRK fascist is ludicrous, the Workers Party of Korea was formed as the crowning result of the struggle against Japanese Fascism and today is one of the most courageous opponents of Amerikan fascism. Fascism is characterized by expansionist policies and the DPRK has never engaged in an offensive war of conquest.

There are thousands of american soldiers and numerous america military bases all over South Korea and the war never officially ended. For Koreans in the North, it truly feels as if the war continues today. It is easy to criticize their perceived "militarism", but this word carries an inaccurate connotation. True the DPRK gives the military political, economic, and cultural priority but the function of the military there is radically different. They have many of the same functions as a national guard and are responsible for rescue missions during floods and earthquakes, distributing food and supplies, and providing assistance in agricultural and industrial work. The leadership of the DPRK decided to transform the military into its leading force during the epoch of imperialism as a means of self-defense in desperate times. Precedence on taking up arms and emphasis on military affairs is logical when you are literally STILL AT WAR: the national liberation of Korea is not yet complete as it is still divided and the Korean war never officially ended; for decades the West sent spies and sabatours to infiltrate the Party and disrupt production, as well as implementing crippling economic sanctions.

Korea's "Military First Policy", Songun, is not reactionary. Marx stated that the military was a part of the working class, albeit "class traitors" as they were servants of the bourgeois state. The military in service of a workers state (problems and contradictions nonwithstanding) thus functions in the opposite way of an imperialist one. The fact that the military receives primary funding is no longer shocking when one realises that the north korean state is still in a state of war and that its military also doubles as a sort of welfare agency. Kim Jong-Il explains that the Proletarian Revolution itself is characterized by the working class taking up arms to oust the oppressors violently, naturally the arm bearing sector of the new workers society is the core of maintaining the revolutionary process, especially in its ongoing struggle for survival in the face of imperialist onslaught and in providing concrete assistance to other progressive struggles in the spirit of proletarian internationalism.

[Zostrianos]

Calling the DPRK fascist is ludicrous, the Workers Party of Korea was formed as the crowning result of the struggle against Japanese Fascism and today is one of the most courageous opponents of Amerikan fascism. Fascism is characterized by expansionist policies and the DPRK has never engaged in an offensive war of conquest.


No, North Korea's war is against its own people. A regime that has replaced religion with a compulsory cult of personality, that lets most of its people starve while terrorizing them and blowing money on grandiose projects to honour its dictators, that publicly executes anyone who tries to escape....etc. Any labels used to describe the Kim dictatorship are irrelevant. It's an oppressive, evil autocracy, and the fact that it's opposed to American imperialism doesn't change a thing. The enemy of your enemy is not necessarily your friend.

[Lokomotive293]

that lets most of its people starve

Actually, the situation has gotten a lot better since the 1990s. Also, I have not yet seen proof that the North Korean government is responsible for the food shortage, or causing it on purpose, as you seem to be claiming.


publicly executes anyone who tries to escape

Care to give evidence for that? I'm interested.


Any labels used to describe the Kim dictatorship are irrelevant

I thought we were Marxists trying to analyze and understand things before we judge them.


It's an oppressive, evil autocracy, and the fact that it's opposed to American imperialism doesn't change a thing.

It's kind of odd that all countries that are opposed to American Imperialism are oppressive, evil autocracies...

[Zostrianos]

Actually, the situation has gotten a lot better since the 1990s. Also, I have not yet seen proof that the North Korean government is responsible for the food shortage, or causing it on purpose, as you seem to be claiming.

The fact that they blow money on useless projects (instead of ensuring the welfare of their people), and never let cameramen film people in the countryside should be proof enough. Also:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LGR0BD2e1Ok




Care to give evidence for that? I'm interested.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SAQE7kDwPZY



I thought we were Marxists trying to analyze and understand things before we judge them.

That argument can be used in any context. I could pick the worst atrocities and evils ever committed, and minimize them by saying something like "well, we can't really judge". It's the same logic Stalinists use to brush off Stalin's crimes as no big deal.



It's kind of odd that all countries that are opposed to American Imperialism are oppressive, evil autocracies...

So, where did I say that exactly?

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

Defenders of North Korea, I have a deed to a bridge I'd like to sell you.

[Red Banana]

Then you must have absolutely no idea what "reactionary" means.

Reactionary: wanting to return to a previous state; conservatism

^ That's basically how I see it.

In this bourgeois democratic era that seems to go on forever, people have made a good deal of reforms that improve our condition in certain countries. These reforms, things like the right to form an independent labor union, the right to due process, the right to free speech, etc. were not always around. So people who would want to return to a state where these rights do not exist would be labeled "reactionary".

Well, North Korea is a place where these rights do not exist, so the people who advocate and implement North Korean policy would be called "reactionaries" as they want to roll back all (or most) of the progress that was made in the 19th and 20th centuries.

If you have a different definition I welcome you to explain it to me, and how it does not apply to North Korea.

[l'Enfermé]

No, it's not Fascist nor Communist.

Other than that you won't get an exact answer from anyone here because different groups hold different positions.

I, and many other Marxist-Leninists, hold the position that it is a workers' state even though it has contradictions and deformities. We support it on that basis and on the basis of anti-imperialism.

You get others, whom you've seen some of the answers, that say it is state-capitalist, neo-feudalist (lol), and other odd descriptions that I don't know nor care about because I just find them stupid and un-Marxist.

Enjoy this thread because it's probably going to turn into a shit storm.
A worker's state but with contradictions and deformities? Are you sure you're a Marxist-Leninist, because that's the usual Trotskyist stuff we hear all the time. Degenerated this, deformed that, etc., etc.

[Sea]

We support it on that basis and on the basis of anti-imperialism.If "Democratic" Kampuchea still existed, you'd be making even more of a fool of yourself. :rolleyes:

edit: I guess I should clarify.

We should support the people (who just happen to live in the Norther part of the Korean peninsula) against foreign aggression and invasion. We should not support the North Korean state, nor is it necessary or justified to do so on the grounds of anti-imperialism.

[Leftsolidarity]

A worker's state but with contradictions and deformities? Are you sure you're a Marxist-Leninist, because that's the usual Trotskyist stuff we hear all the time. Degenerated this, deformed that, etc., etc.

We're about to return to an old debate about whether Marxism-Leninism means "Stalinism" or those who adhere to the prinicples of Marx and Lenin while still seeing the contrabutions of those who came after them.

I take an influence from Trotsky but would not be considered a "Trotskyist" like most others. I've heard people refer to it as "Post-Trotskyism", hell if I know what that actually means. I stick to Marxist-Leninist.

[Homo Songun]

Calling the DPRK fascist is ludicrous, the Workers Party of Korea was formed as the crowning result of the struggle against Japanese Fascism and today is one of the most courageous opponents of Amerikan fascism. Fascism is characterized by expansionist policies and the DPRK has never engaged in an offensive war of conquest.
No, North Korea's war is against its own people.
Not even Jimmy Carter, former CEO of US Imperialism believes this sort of neo-conservative nonsense (http://www.cartercenter.org/news/editorials_speeches/jimmy-carter-speech-korea-university.html), rather acknowledging the DPRK's military stance as being reactive to and contingent on relations with the US at any given time.

You are literally to right of the mainstream of Capital on this issue. A strange place for a supposed revolutionary. Really, what you have to say about the DPRK is more or less indistinguishable from vintage Bush II rhetoric, expect that even he had to back away (http://www.cfr.org/proliferation/president-bushs-speech-north-korea-june-2008/p16646) from some of his more bellicose idiocies with regards to DPRK's membership in the "axis of evil" !

[Tim Cornelis]

Not even Jimmy Carter, former CEO of US Imperialism believes this sort of neo-conservative nonsense (http://www.cartercenter.org/news/editorials_speeches/jimmy-carter-speech-korea-university.html), rather acknowledging the DPRK's military stance as being reactive to and contingent on relations with the US at any given time.

You are literally to right of the mainstream of Capital on this issue. A strange place for a supposed revolutionary. Really, what you have to say about the DPRK is more or less indistinguishable from vintage Bush II rhetoric, expect that even he had to back away (http://www.cfr.org/proliferation/president-bushs-speech-north-korea-june-2008/p16646) from some of his more bellicose idiocies with regards to DPRK's membership in the "axis of evil" !

This does not refute what he said now does it? You're on the right-wing of capital by agreeing with the bourgeoisie and reactionaries that the USSR was socialist. It's a guilt by association fallacy.

[Homo Songun]

lol, if anything its an argument from authority (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority): Carter was the CEO of imperialism. The CEO of imperialism is knowledgeable of geopolitical issues. Therefore his opinion on Korean geopolitics is correct.

Association fallacy: John is a con artist. John has black hair. Therefore, all people with black hair are con artists.

Thank you for playing

[Red Enemy]

We're about to return to an old debate about whether Marxism-Leninism means "Stalinism" or those who adhere to the prinicples of Marx and Lenin while still seeing the contrabutions of those who came after them.

I take an influence from Trotsky but would not be considered a "Trotskyist" like most others. I've heard people refer to it as "Post-Trotskyism", hell if I know what that actually means. I stick to Marxist-Leninist.
Historically "Marxist-Leninist" referred to Stalinism, because Stalin coined to term to mean what he believed, socialism in one country, bureaucratic super-centralism, anti-sovietism, etc.

Marxism-Leninism is neither Marxist, nor Leninist.

[Flying Purple People Eater]

The DPRK is one of the main bulwarks against fascism in the world today. If it seems militaristic to newbie leftists, that's because, it is like, you know, been continuously at war with the most powerful military in the history of the world for the last 60 years or so.
So basically, what you're saying is this: "Yeah these shitbags are bastards, rightists and murderers who run their own little police state, but they fight against bigger shitbags who are more obscure so It's alright."

Just piss off. :laugh:

[Leftsolidarity]

Historically "Marxist-Leninist" referred to Stalinism, because Stalin coined to term to mean what he believed, socialism in one country, bureaucratic super-centralism, anti-sovietism, etc.

Marxism-Leninism is neither Marxist, nor Leninist.

Cool story bro but wrong thread

[Red Enemy]

Cool story bro but wrong thread
Then, why are you complaining about it to begin with, and making the historically incorrect notion that Marxism-Leninism is not Stalinism?

[Leftsolidarity]

Then, why are you complaining about it to begin with, and making the historically incorrect notion that Marxism-Leninism is not Stalinism?

What the fuck are you on about? What was I complaining about and historically incorrect my ass.

If you go read my posts you can see that I made a single comment to clarify something to a different poster but also saying how that is a completely different conversation. If you want to have that discussion, go to a thread (which there are many if you search for them) for it. This thread is dedicated to a different shit storm.

[Spurcatu]

Fascism can be described simply as the cooperation between state and capitalism
Benito Mussolini had a the following description of fascism:
"Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of State and corporate power."
While Vladimir Ilyich Lenin described fascism: "Fascism is capitalism in decay."
Fascism aims at the dictatorship of a single individual.
Communism aims at the "dictatorship" of the proletariat, where dictatorship does not reflect the governing of a state by a single or a few individuals without democratic choice but rather a metaphorical expression of the situation where the proletariat owns the whole means of production under a democratic process.
Communism defined very simple is when the masses aim at a revolution through which they eliminate: all social inequality, all social stratification, all private property, while the means of production are held in common ownership.
North Korea is a form of stalinist communism mixed with what appears to resemble monarhic traditions where the sovereign is a single individual in which the office is passed through inheritance to another family member (the firstborn boy) and where the cult of personality further enhances the aura of control and authority to the point of deification, status rejected by the Korean leaders.

[GoddessCleoLover]

IMO the Kim dynasty is using nukes to shake down the international community for dollars and using the military to terrorize its internal population, including its suffering proletariat. The Kim dynasty has nothing to do with historical Fascism. OTOH they use Marxism-Leninism as a fig leaf for the Juche Idea which has nothing to do with the proletariat. Seriously, can anyone imagine Uncle Karl and Uncle Friedrich promoting a military first policy? One would have to take lotsa acid for THAT bad trip.

[Sinister Cultural Marxist]

The DPRK is a military despotism.

"Oh" the anti-Imperialist says "but the US has been at war with them so they need that military!" That is nonsens. The DPRK has well above and beyond what it would ever need to deter a US invasion. Simply put, the opportunity costs of the USA assaulting the North Korean regime is too much, and the military of the DPRK could get away with being much smaller without risking an attack from the US. Nations like Venezuela and Cuba are much more valuable targets for American Imperialism yet both manage to deter American assault. And the DPRK, unlike those other countries, functions as a buffer zone between the US and RoK, so the likelihood that China would just let the US attack the DPRK is unlikely.

What is worse, the military, bureaucracy and the upper echelon of leadership is not run by the workers. This is why the DPRK is NOT as Leftsolidarity is arguing a "worker's state". To be a "worker's state" you need a state run by workers upholding the material interests of the state's working class. The working class must have direct sovereignty over political affairs. On the contrary, the DPRK is run by a dynasty. Why have there been three Kims since 1950? What on earth does that have to do with worker's control over the means of production? What does a cult of the leader have to do with worker's control over the means of production? Calling the DPRK a worker's state is crazy, you might as well call Bonaparte III or Bismark proto-Leninists. There's simply no theoretical basis behind the declaration that the DPRK is a worker's state, just anti-imperialist sentiments.

Why does the DPRK spend money on expensive propaganda pieces while its people starve? Why does it feed its military and not its workers? Why does it pimp out its workers to Russian and Mongolian Capitalists to work for next to nothing while the State collects the financial benefits? Why is it implementing rural markets even though most rural people in North Korea lack the ability to purchase food on the open market? It's ludicrous to call the country a worker's state.

Of course, the US bombed the snot out of the DPRK and maintains a great deal of military presence in the area so some deterrence is justified, but there's no excuse for blatant militarism and extreme cults of personality.

[Homo Songun]

OTOH they use Marxism-Leninism as a fig leaf for the Juche Idea which has nothing to do with the proletariat.

That is not true. Kim Jong Il said "the working-class party is the general staff of the revolution" in on the Juche Idea and that Marxism-Leninism is the basis of the Juche ideology in many places.


Seriously, can anyone imagine Uncle Karl and Uncle Friedrich promoting a military first policy?Yes, I can. Here's Fred:


A revolution is certainly the most authoritarian thing there is; it is the act whereby one part of the population imposes its will upon the other part by means of rifles, bayonets and cannon — authoritarian means, if such there be at all; and if the victorious party does not want to have fought in vain, it must maintain this rule by means of the terror which its arms inspire in the reactionists. Would the Paris Commune have lasted a single day if it had not made use of this authority of the armed people against the bourgeois? Should we not, on the contrary, reproach it for not having used it freely enough?

Pretty hair-raising verbiage compared to the relatively mild Kim Il Sung, here:


As long as imperialism exists on the earth, a working-class state cannot be safe from the threat of imperialist aggression. Only when it has an adequate defence capacity to protect itself can it ensure its national sovereignty from imperialist aggression and preserve the achievements of the revolution and construction.

In turn, in formulating the "Songun" policy, Kim Jong il built upon the thought of Marx & Engels explicitly in the context of the world-wide roll-back of socialism in the 1990s; let alone the continuing occupation of the lower half of the Korean peninsula. As political scientist Kim Chol U notes,


It is a contradiction, therefore, to ignore the armed forces, keep them out of politics or deny their ideological character.In other words, without a Peoples Army, the people have nothing.

[Lokomotive293]

We should support the people (who just happen to live in the Norther part of the Korean peninsula) against foreign aggression and invasion. We should not support the North Korean state, nor is it necessary or justified to do so on the grounds of anti-imperialism.

Supporting North Korea on the grounds of anti-imperialism means exactly that, though. To defend their right to national self-determination and support them against being rolled over by Imperialism.

[black magick hustla]

Supporting North Korea on the grounds of anti-imperialism means exactly that, though. To defend their right to national self-determination and support them against being rolled over by Imperialism.

"support" for most leftists means hot air. i do think though that communists are defeatists and, if they have the means to, struggle against the military adventures of their own state, which is another can of worms.

anyway, i think it's bizarre that a "workers' state" would have such an extensive and surreal personality cult (which is not a bourgeois lie or whatever, it is pretty well documented). i sometimes think the whole nutty first world maoist/stalinist/marcyte shitty pr work on the dprk is mostly trolling/being contrarian, because those sects are kinda insignificant and you need to drink a lot of your kool aid to believe that an economy that pimps their workers as "cheap and reliable" to other countries and has the stalinist equivalent of a royal family on its helm is a "workers' state".

but obviously i am tailing the bourgeois hound dogs of imperialism by expressing this opinion in an internet forum, i apologize to the ghost of sam marcy and maoist honkeys

[Leftsolidarity]

anyway, i think it's bizarre that a "workers' state" would have such an extensive and surreal personality cult (which is not a bourgeois lie or whatever, it is pretty well documented). i sometimes think the whole nutty first world maoist/stalinist/marcyte shitty pr work on the dprk is mostly trolling/being contrarian, because those sects are kinda insignificant and you need to drink a lot of your kool aid to believe that an economy that pimps their workers as "cheap and reliable" to other countries and has the stalinist equivalent of a royal family on its helm is a "workers' state".



"insignificant" and "irrelevant" and "sects" seem to be the Revleft words of the month. And speaking from the "Marcyte" position, it's neither trolling nor being contrarian. It's supporting our side of the class war.


but obviously i am tailing the bourgeois hound dogs of imperialism by expressing this opinion in an internet forum, i apologize to the ghost of sam marcy and maoist honkeys

The Almighty Marcy forgives you

[Comrade #138672]

Fascism can be described simply as the cooperation between state and capitalism
Benito Mussolini had a the following description of fascism:
"Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of State and corporate power."
While Vladimir Ilyich Lenin described fascism: "Fascism is capitalism in decay."
Fascism aims at the dictatorship of a single individual.
Communism aims at the "dictatorship" of the proletariat, where dictatorship does not reflect the governing of a state by a single or a few individuals without democratic choice but rather a metaphorical expression of the situation where the proletariat owns the whole means of production under a democratic process.
Communism defined very simple is when the masses aim at a revolution through which they eliminate: all social inequality, all social stratification, all private property, while the means of production are held in common ownership.
North Korea is a form of stalinist communism mixed with what appears to resemble monarhic traditions where the sovereign is a single individual in which the office is passed through inheritance to another family member (the firstborn boy) and where the cult of personality further enhances the aura of control and authority to the point of deification, status rejected by the Korean leaders.You do seem to describe 2 Fascists elements. (1) The cult of personality. Fascists fetishize individual personality and heroism. (2) The obsession with inheritance and bloodlines. Although this is more Nazism than Fascism.

[Zostrianos]

In other words, without a Peoples Army, the people have nothing.

Here's footage of the "People's" army relaxing, eating ice cream and watching while poor kids are eating out of dumpsters and starving to death:
zgNr5FIqILE

[Sea]

Supporting North Korea on the grounds of anti-imperialism means exactly that, though. To defend their right to national self-determination and support them against being rolled over by Imperialism.But the Kim Jong State has no more of a valid claim to rule than an imperialist aggressor would.

[Leftsolidarity]

But the Kim Jong State has no more of a valid claim to rule than an imperialist aggressor would.

Are you fucking serious?

[Drosophila]

You can't support North Korea "against imperialism." Imperialism is a universal stage of global capitalism, not an act. The only way to stop imperialism is to stop capitalism.

[Sinister Cultural Marxist]

"insignificant" and "irrelevant" and "sects" seem to be the Revleft words of the month. And speaking from the "Marcyte" position, it's neither trolling nor being contrarian. It's supporting our side of the class war.


How is a dynastic military despot with a laughably absurd cult of personality on "our side" of the class war? Is it because their party flag has both a hammer and a sickle on it, is it because of some leftist-sounding cliche Kim il Sung wrote, or is it because of a fallacious "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" reasoning? Look at the structure of the politics and economy of the DRPK, not the propaganda.

[Rational Radical]

This is insanity really,there's no possible way that a state that terrorizes its population and enriches an autocratic,monarchical bureaucracy be considered a "workers state",in your words Leftsolidarity " Are you fucking kidding me?" I'm going to be honest here,we might come on here to discuss and debate but when the revolution comes it's going to be real communists vs capitalists(whether private or state) and by any means necessary,i vow to fightto establish a new social order in which we all benefit. Take it however you want,let 20th century "communism" rot in its grave or rot with it.

[Sea]

Are you fucking serious?I'm very fucking serious, tanks for asking.

I guess this is the part where you defend the DPRK apparatus as the "rightful ruler" over the land it possesses...

[Brosa Luxemburg]

"insignificant" and "irrelevant" and "sects" seem to be the Revleft words of the month. And speaking from the "Marcyte" position, it's neither trolling nor being contrarian. It's supporting our side of the class war.

Oh. My. God.

Please, oh please, tell me how North Korea is on "our" side of the class war, how North Korea represents a society that the working class needs to defend. Please, tell me.

[TheGodlessUtopian]

I guess this is the part where you defend the DPRK apparatus as the "rightful ruler" over the land it possesses...

What do you mean as "rightful ruler"? Are you saying that North Korea shouldn't exist; you are, hopefully, not advocating for Imperialist Intervention, are you?

[Sea]

What do you mean as "rightful ruler"? Are you saying that North Korea shouldn't exist; you are, hopefully, not advocating for Imperialist Intervention, are you?No, I mean that defending the North Korean state is the wrong way to go about anti-imperialism if the goal is to help the working class, because the North Korean state is just as inherently classist as any imperialist aggressor. If North Korea was indeed a worker's state then defending it against bourgeois states would be warranted. In this case, however, a sort of mass organic defense for the North Korean people that both defends them from their own oppressive state as well as from the invading state would be desired.

Granted this is unrealistic at this point as we don't have a real way to organize for the liberation of the North Korean people, but the same can be said about organizing in support of the North Korean state.

[Leftsolidarity]

Wow ok. I'll continue to discuss this topic but if all ya ultra-leftists could have a quick huddle and put out the main few questions/statements in a concise post that would be awesome. I'm not answering 50 different variations of similar bullshit to like 6 different people.

[Rational Radical]

So anyone who objects to the DPRK as being socialist is an ultra-leftist? I mean i'll accept the label but what about the genuine,orthodox marxists who view it for what it really is and wouldn't want to defend or replicate a society that's such anti-working class? Just drop the label "pan-leftists"(which can never happen since the 'left' consists of genuine communists,social democrats and M-Ls) and adopt Stalinist please.

[Red Enemy]

Wow ok. I'll continue to discuss this topic but if all ya ultra-leftists could have a quick huddle and put out the main few questions/statements in a concise post that would be awesome. I'm not answering 50 different variations of similar bullshit to like 6 different people.
What makes North Korea a workers' state?

[Let's Get Free]

Wow ok. I'll continue to discuss this topic but if all ya ultra-leftists could have a quick huddle and put out the main few questions/statements in a concise post that would be awesome. I'm not answering 50 different variations of similar bullshit to like 6 different people.

For what reason do you support this disgusting little state capitalist regime?

[Leftsolidarity]

What makes North Korea a workers' state?

It was established from a national liberation struggle by the oppressed and exploited classes of Korea and run by their party that acts in their interests.

[Leftsolidarity]

For what reason do you support this disgusting little state capitalist regime?

I'm ignoring your stupidity.

[Homo Songun]

In other words, without a Peoples Army, the people have nothing.
Here's footage of the "People's" army relaxing, eating ice cream and watching while poor kids are eating out of dumpsters and starving to death:
zgNr5FIqILE

Are you sure they aren't just being punished for not weeping loudly (http://www.revleft.com/vb/north-koreans-sent-t166786/index.html?t=166786) enough at the Dear Leader's funeral?

(Judging by the number of grainy videos of asian people like doing stuff or whatever on Youtube, there must be a hell of a lot (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YfFMbAClrzE) of spy cams in Pyongyang these days!) :rolleyes:

Seriously though. Suppose we grant that this bargain bin propaganda is what you think it is, just for the sake of argument.

How does it address, let alone refute, what Jimmy Carter says about the essentially defensive and reactive actions of the DPRK military? I'm talking about the link I posted in which he discusses Bush deep-sixing South Korean president Kim Dae Jung's "Sunshine Policy", by threatening military action and placing the DPRK into the "Axis of Evil".

How does your mock horror at dirty street children address, let alone refute, the buildup of the DPRK military in response to having the lower half of their country filled with sabre-rattling occupying forces for the last 60 years? Do you even accept the DPRK's right to nuclear weapons in light of the fact that the US kept tactical nukes in the southern part of the peninsula for decades (http://thediplomat.com/2012/06/06/no-to-u-s-nukes-in-south-korea/)?

Again, this isn't some raving Marxist here, but the former chief executive of Imperialism admitting that the nuclear problem isn't with the DPRK, but the US reneging on previous "No First Use" pledges, the anti-ballistic missile treaties, comprehensive test bans, and IAEA proposals for nuclear safeguards in Korea itself!

It doesn't at all. It's just impressionistic liberal hand-wringing. Too bad the Koreans themselves don't (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_Gun_Ri_Massacre) have (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeju_Uprising) such (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bodo_League_massacre) luxuries (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinchon_Massacre).

[Let's Get Free]

It was established from a national liberation struggle by the oppressed and exploited classes of Korea and run by their party that acts in their interests.


Bourgeois nationalism is the ideology of an actual or aspirant capitalist class that seeks the way to its own independent state blocked by imperialism and therefore must mobilize the masses to help break down this obstacle. Regimes that may now present themselves as anti-imperialist have a history of collaborating with imperialism. It is of the essence of bourgeois nationalists that, when imperialism prevents them for building their own independent capitalist state, they may lead struggles against it, but they are striving to carve out a place for themselves within the existing system, not to overthrow it.

[Zostrianos]

Seriously though. Suppose we grant that this bargain bin propaganda is what you think it is, just for the sake of argument.


I'm surprised the "propaganda" dismissal didn't come earlier. I'll just propose the experiment I always do when Stalinists and Juche supporters defend the Kim regime and dismiss its crimes as propaganda. Go to North Korea, and publicly insult the Dear Leader. Now, if all the allegations and video evidence are simply propaganda, you should be able to do that with no problem. Then, and only then can you be in a position to defend the Kim dictatorship.

But whatever. I know that no matter what evidence I post, you'll just dismiss it as propaganda.

[Homo Songun]

I'm working on the assumption that it is totally true. Address my main question.

[Leftsolidarity]

Bourgeois nationalism is the ideology of an actual or aspirant capitalist class that seeks the way to its own independent state blocked by imperialism and therefore must mobilize the masses to help break down this obstacle. Regimes that may now present themselves as anti-imperialist have a history of collaborating with imperialism. It is of the essence of bourgeois nationalists that, when imperialism prevents them for building their own independent capitalist state, they may lead struggles against it, but they are striving to carve out a place for themselves within the existing system, not to overthrow it.

Ok but none of that relates to the DPRK because it wasn't bourgeois nationalism (especially seeing as that it was lead by the oppressed and exploited classes and not the bourgeoisie) and the DPRK doesn't have a history of collaboration which is one of the things they are attacked by the imperialist media about.

[Leftsolidarity]

I'm surprised the "propaganda" dismissal didn't come earlier. I'll just propose the experiment I always do when Stalinists and Juche supporters defend the Kim regime and dismiss its crimes as propaganda. Go to North Korea, and publicly insult the Dear Leader. Now, if all the allegations and video evidence are simply propaganda, you should be able to do that with no problem. Then, and only then can you be in a position to defend the Kim dictatorship.

But whatever. I know that no matter what evidence I post, you'll just dismiss it as propaganda.

lol what kind of position is this? I publicly insult our bourgeois leaders and institutions on an almost daily basis and haven't been arrested for it. Should I defend them now? :rolleyes:

[Zostrianos]

I'm working on the assumption that it is totally true. Address my main question.

Your question is irrelevant, because I'm addressing what goes on inside the country, how the people are suffering at the hands of their government. The fact that the US were the aggressors originally, and that the DPRK remains in a defensive position is not a reason to support their government as you seem to be suggesting. The relation between the regime and the rest of the world is irrelevant to me - my main concern is the crimes that are taking place daily against the North Korean people by their rulers (and not by the US anymore). A regime that destroys its people's lives and oppresses them deserves no support.


It was established from a national liberation struggle by the oppressed and exploited classes of Korea and run by their party that acts in their interests.

Please tell me you're joking. Please.

[Red Sun]

I have a question. If everything in the news that casts a bad light on North Korea is capitalist propaganda and thus can be dismissed entirely, what sources of information do you suggest we use to learn what is going on in North Korea?

[Homo Songun]

Your question is irrelevant, because I'm addressing what goes on inside the country, how the people are suffering at the hands of their government. The fact that the US were the aggressors originally, and that the DPRK remains in a defensive position is not a reason to support their government as you seem to be suggesting. The relation between the regime and the rest of the world is irrelevant to me - my main concern is the crimes that are taking place daily against the North Korean people by their rulers (and not by the US anymore). A regime that destroys its people's lives and oppresses them deserves no support.

OK, I see, my question was irrelevant (to you) because you weren't actually engaging in the conversation between Gramsci Guy and I when you replied to my post, you were just sort of using it as an opportunity to impressionistically riff about stuff... :thumbdown:

[Let's Get Free]

Ok but none of that relates to the DPRK because it wasn't bourgeois nationalism (especially seeing as that it was lead by the oppressed and exploited classes and not the bourgeoisie)

Then why would that oppressed and exploited class oppress and exploit themselves? We're talking about a nation that prostitutes itself out to foreign capitalists, a nation that's basically a capitalists wet dream- ruthlessly devoted to the extraction of profits, proactively preventing strikes and conflicts before they can occur, disciplining labor etc etc.

[Engels]

Seriously, can anyone imagine Uncle Karl and Uncle Friedrich promoting a military first policy?

Yes, I can. Here's Fred:



A revolution is certainly the most authoritarian thing there is; it is the act whereby one part of the population imposes its will upon the other part by means of rifles, bayonets and cannon — authoritarian means, if such there be at all; and if the victorious party does not want to have fought in vain, it must maintain this rule by means of the terror which its arms inspire in the reactionists. Would the Paris Commune have lasted a single day if it had not made use of this authority of the armed people against the bourgeois? Should we not, on the contrary, reproach it for not having used it freely enough?




Come on, you can do better than that. Engels is talking about the inherently authoritarian nature of a revolution. From that quote, Engels doesn't have any problems, organisationally or structurally, with how the workers carried out the defence of the Commune (abolishing the standing army and arming all workers capable of bearing arms) but rather feels that it should have used terror more freely. He’s analysing the defence of the Paris Commune; he isn’t justifying some military state-capitalist dictatorship. Try again.

[Alekséi]

I think North Korea has an authoritarian communism. It´s possible that combination -and we do not want it to be like that- On the other hand, it´s impossible to have a fascist government mixed with communism are diametrically opposed. Are opposed ideologies, opposed points of view and I do not see the relation between real fascism and North Korea.

[Alekséi]

I think North Korea has an authoritarian communism. It´s possible that combination -and we do not want it to be like that- On the other hand, it´s impossible to have a fascist government mixed with communism are diametrically opposed. Are opposed ideologies, opposed points of view and I do not see the relation between real fascism and North Korea.

[Sinister Cultural Marxist]

It was established from a national liberation struggle by the oppressed and exploited classes of Korea

No it was a guerrilla movement led by Kim il Sung, there was no meeting of the Korean "oppressed and exploited classes" where he was chosen as the singular leader of said "oppressed and exploited classes." He never even drove the Japanese out of Korea, that was the Soviet Union which severely battered the Japanese army occupying Korea and of course thought Kim il Sung would make a suitable and reliable Stalinist ally and manager of the northern half of the peninsula that they occupied.


and run by their party that acts in their interests.Yeah let's all take a hyper-militaristic dynastic cult at its word that it really "acts in their interests". Every government in the world says it is acting in the interests of their "oppressed and exploited classes", it doesn't mean that they do.


Wow ok. I'll continue to discuss this topic but if all ya ultra-leftists could have a quick huddle and put out the main few questions/statements in a concise post that would be awesome. I'm not answering 50 different variations of similar bullshit to like 6 different people. You do realize that dismissing people by saying what they are arguing is "bullshit" is well, "bullshit" right? As is making a blanket statement about the other people's ideological commitments.

[TheTrotskyist☭]

Lets just say that if Karl Marx was here today, he'd wipe his ass with the North Korean Flag.

[Leftsolidarity]

Lets just say that if Karl Marx was here today, he'd wipe his ass with the North Korean Flag.

Great first post. And lets not say that.

[Ostrinski]

I don't need anyone to act in my interests and I protest and stand ready to apprehend any entity that sees it fit to do so.

The DPRK is most certainly not a worker's state. For it to be a worker's state the workers themselves would have to be in direct control of said state and the government deputies and representatives would have to be recallable and accountable. Certainly there is no accountability to be found in a regime run by people who are so in love with themselves as to use the language, imagery, and rhetoric that the Kims feel inclinded to use.

The correct stance for the North Korean workers and for all workers in countries under siege is a defeatist one, i.e. Lenin's approach to WWI. Even though there is no broader imperialist war to the effect of WWI nor massive amounts of class consciousness across the globe, but the working classes and their parties should always exploit situations where their own domestic ruling class is in danger to push more tenaciously toward their displacement.

[Leftsolidarity]

The correct stance for the North Korean workers and for all workers in countries under siege is a defeatist one, i.e. Lenin's approach to WWI. Even though there is no broader imperialist war to the effect of WWI nor massive amounts of class consciousness across the globe, but the working classes and their parties should always exploit situations where their own domestic ruling class is in danger to push more tenaciously toward their displacement.

That'd be true if the DPRK was imperialist (which it's not). It's a country under seige by an imperialist power trying to recolonize it and you say the workers should have a defeatist attitude??

[Brosa Luxemburg]

That'd be true if the DPRK was imperialist (which it's not).

Imperialism isn't a "policy" so to speak. In capitalism's decadent form all nations are imperialist. The only way to stop imperialism is to stop capitalism. Smaller nations (North Korea) in this epoch of capitalism are absorbed by larger nations for their own imperialist interests (China). To struggle against imperialism we need to struggle against finance capital, ergo capitalism in general. We shouldn't be asking the proletariat to side with one side of the bourgeoisie against another, but supporting the proletariat overthrowing the bourgeoisie, and capitalism, altogether. The cry for "national liberation" is outdated.

[Brosa Luxemburg]

No it was a guerrilla movement led by Kim il Sung, there was no meeting of the Korean "oppressed and exploited classes" where he was chosen as the singular leader of said "oppressed and exploited classes." He never even drove the Japanese out of Korea, that was the Soviet Union which severely battered the Japanese army occupying Korea and of course thought Kim il Sung would make a suitable and reliable Stalinist ally and manager of the northern half of the peninsula that they occupied.

Fun fact: Kim il Sung was hiding in the Soviet Union the entire time that the Japanese were in Korea. He wasn't a "great leader" who "helped lead the exploited and oppressed classes" but a coward established as a ruler by an authority above rather than the oppressed below.

[Leftsolidarity]

Imperialism isn't a "policy" so to speak. In capitalism's decadent form all nations are imperialist. The only way to stop imperialism is to stop capitalism. Smaller nations (North Korea) in this epoch of capitalism are absorbed by larger nations for their own imperialist interests (China). To struggle against imperialism we need to struggle against finance capital, ergo capitalism in general. We shouldn't be asking the proletariat to side with one side of the bourgeoisie against another, but supporting the proletariat overthrowing the bourgeoisie, and capitalism, altogether. The cry for "national liberation" is outdated.

Imperialism isn't a mystical cast upon the earth and now suddenly everything is imperialist. The DPRK is in no way an imperialist country and its entire existance is a spit in the face to imperialism. The PRC is also not an imperialist country (I remember the massive thread or two where everyone throughly flushed out why they feel the PRC is or is not imperialist. I side that the PRC is not imperialist.) Siding with the DPRK is not choosing sides of the bourgeoisie because the country is not run by the bourgeoisie nor does it have any imperialist characteristic. It is supporting the struggle against capitalism, imperialism, and self-determination.

Yes, the cry for liberation is so outdated how silly I am to oppose imperialist occupation :rolleyes:

[Drosophila]

^Someone's never read Lenin or Bukharin.

[Ostrinski]

That'd be true if the DPRK was imperialist (which it's not). It's a country under seige by an imperialist power trying to recolonize it and you say the workers should have a defeatist attitude??Defeatism is only a useful strategy if it is conceivable that the government of your own country stands at risk of defeat or collapse, such as in Russia during WWI.

[Brosa Luxemburg]

Imperialism isn't a mystical cast upon the earth and now suddenly everything is imperialist.

I agree. It was a process of global capitalism in it's decadent form.


The DPRK is in no way an imperialist country and its entire existance is a spit in the face to imperialism.

This is hilarious. The DPRK is a "spit in the face of imperialism"? Really? Okay, taking it that you were being serious, the only reason North Korea, that unstable and on the edge of crumbling nation, still exists is because China uses it as a buffer between it and the U.S. backed south. The Japanese are exploiting the North's mineral wealth and export capital into it. Putin has visited the recently deceased Kim Jong Il for establishing the building of a railway between the North and South, giving them control over a trade route and be a huge source of profit for Russia. North Korea plays the imperialist game, to be sure.


The PRC is also not an imperialist country (I remember the massive thread or two where everyone throughly flushed out why they feel the PRC is or is not imperialist. I side that the PRC is not imperialist.)

This thread isn't about China, but that is a ridiculous notion.


Siding with the DPRK is not choosing sides of the bourgeoisie because the country is not run by the bourgeoisie

Please go on with this............this should be interesting :D


Yes, the cry for liberation is so outdated how silly I am to oppose imperialist occupation :rolleyes:

Hey, at least i'm not the moron defending North Korea as on the side of the proletariat. Seriously, you have no room to be condescending.

[Ethics Gradient, Traitor For All Ages]

Imperialism isn't a mystical cast upon the earth and now suddenly everything is imperialist. The DPRK is in no way an imperialist country and its entire existance is a spit in the face to imperialism. The PRC is also not an imperialist country (I remember the massive thread or two where everyone throughly flushed out why they feel the PRC is or is not imperialist. I side that the PRC is not imperialist.) Siding with the DPRK is not choosing sides of the bourgeoisie because the country is not run by the bourgeoisie nor does it have any imperialist characteristic. It is supporting the struggle against capitalism, imperialism, and self-determination.

Yes, the cry for liberation is so outdated how silly I am to oppose imperialist occupation :rolleyes:

This has been bugging me, are you quoting yourself in your signature?

[Astarte]

While I do not think the DPRK is any sort of "workers' state", I also do not see it as operating on a capitalist or "state-capitalist" base. Frankly, the term 'state-capitalism' is a bit of an over-simplification and a buzzword that is thrown around far too often as a catch all for any modern mode that does not function on a traditional capitalist base, but rather relies directly on political power and state coercion rather than indirectly on accumulated capital as the primary method of control over labor power and the extraction of the surplus product of labor. While the DPRK does function in a capitalist world economy (sort of - barely), in that it will accept wealth from other nations and lease out corvees of workers to other nations for wealth it does not mean internally capitalistic laws of value are operating in the DPRK.

[Sinister Cultural Marxist]

Imperialism isn't a mystical cast upon the earth and now suddenly everything is imperialist. The DPRK is in no way an imperialist country and its entire existance is a spit in the face to imperialism. The PRC is also not an imperialist country (I remember the massive thread or two where everyone throughly flushed out why they feel the PRC is or is not imperialist. I side that the PRC is not imperialist.) Siding with the DPRK is not choosing sides of the bourgeoisie because the country is not run by the bourgeoisie nor does it have any imperialist characteristic. It is supporting the struggle against capitalism, imperialism, and self-determination.

Yes, the cry for liberation is so outdated how silly I am to oppose imperialist occupation :rolleyes:

You think that the PRC isn't Imperialist? :rolleyes: You should read up on how material consumption by bourgeois elites and industrial production China is illegally eating up forest land in places like Cambodia or Papua (http://www.sustainablebusiness.com/index.cfm/go/news.display/id/24327) and how Burmese people are being driven off their land for huge Chinese developments (http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/12/28/us-myanmar-reforms-idUSBRE8BR02P20121228) ... but this is about the DPRK, not China. Any country which participates in or helps an Imperialist power, as South Vietnam did, is Imperialist. The DPRK (aside from acting as a buffer zone for the allegedly non-Imperialistic Chinese) pimps out their workers to Russian and Mongolian firms, advertising their low-low-wages (which all goes to the government of the DPRK) but hey, of course, it's not a part of global Imperialism right? :rolleyes:

Being the Imperialist's butler still makes you an Imperialist. Participating from the Global Market and attempting to utilize it to extract surplus value from other parts of the world makes you an Imperialist, and serving other countries which does that makes you an Imperialist too.


Anyway, you still haven't defended this absolutely crazy notion that the DPRK is a "Worker's State". Let's see an argument for how that makes sense, because all the evidence is to the contrary, with the exception of a few incredibly superficial aspects.

[hetz]

Participating from the Global Market and attempting to utilize it to extract surplus value from other parts of the world makes you an Imperialist, and serving other countries which does that makes you an Imperialist too.
According to you then every single country in the world is imperialist.

[Ethics Gradient, Traitor For All Ages]

Every single country in the world is imperialist

[hetz]

Every single country in the world is imperialist
Says who?
Give a credible source on that, thanks.

[Ethics Gradient, Traitor For All Ages]

Imperialism is what the modern nation state exists for, the fact that there are some losers in the process does nothing to change the situation. Fuck your sources, pretend I quoted Lenin or some other idiot you neckbeards adore.

[Brosa Luxemburg]

Anyway, you still haven't defended this absolutely crazy notion that the DPRK is a "Worker's State".

Because it's impossible to do, other than continuously using anti-imperialistic rhetoric and making wild claims without ever backing them up with facts.

[Paul Cockshott]

I think North Korea has an authoritarian communism. It´s possible that combination -and we do not want it to be like that- On the other hand, it´s impossible to have a fascist government mixed with communism are diametrically opposed. Are opposed ideologies, opposed points of view and I do not see the relation between real fascism and North Korea.

This is indeed possible according to Marx who described Inca society as communist albeit that it was headed by a god king.

[Ethics Gradient, Traitor For All Ages]

I don't think a country with a relatively modern infrastructure like North Korea could be an example of primitive communism. Which I'm assuming is what Marx was talking about, although I'm not familiar with that discussion.

[Red Banana]

Fuck your sources, pretend I quoted Lenin or some other idiot you neckbeards adore.

That's going in my signature.:laugh:

[Leftsolidarity]

This has been bugging me, are you quoting yourself in your signature?

Yeah, that's been in there for a long long time. It makes me feel like a badass. Totally not what this thread is about, though.

-----------

Anyhow, where is this conversation going? We've gone over a few pages ago why I defend that it's a workers' state. There's probably people that could explain it much better because like I said, (on I think it was all the way back on page 2) I'm not the be-all-end-all on the DPRK but I do know what side I'm on and why I'm on it. I think we covered pretty much everything about that and now this is onto the old "well they particapate in this or that or blah blah blah" which is what's thrown around for Cuba, China, the USSR, etc. and I really don't care to get into that discussion cuz it's boring, they have to to survive, and I'm honestly just to hungover right now to give a shit.

[Ethics Gradient, Traitor For All Ages]

Yeah, that's been in there for a long long time. It makes me feel like a badass. Totally not what this thread is about, though.

-----------

Anyhow, where is this conversation going? We've gone over a few pages ago why I defend that it's a workers' state. There's probably people that could explain it much better because like I said, (on I think it was all the way back on page 2) I'm not the be-all-end-all on the DPRK but I do know what side I'm on and why I'm on it. I think we covered pretty much everything about that and now this is onto the old "well they particapate in this or that or blah blah blah" which is what's thrown around for Cuba, China, the USSR, etc. and I really don't care to get into that discussion cuz it's boring, they have to to survive, and I'm honestly just to hungover right now to give a shit.

This is the most insightful thing you've said in this thread. Once your revolution deforms into a nation state model, it is then forced to survive against all the other nation states. That drive for survival trumps any revolutionary intent that may have existed and you get yourself a nice little would-be big imperialist country that has a red flag.

[Leftsolidarity]

This is the most insightful thing you've said in this thread. Once your revolution deforms into a nation state model, it is then forced to survive against all the other nation states. That drive for survival trumps any revolutionary intent that may have existed and you get yourself a nice little would-be big imperialist country that has a red flag.

But it's not and doesn't show any intention to be.

What you're basically saying is, "if it's not world revolution all at once it's nothing" which is garbage and priviledged.

[Ethics Gradient, Traitor For All Ages]

North Korea will take any opportunity that will better guarantee it's survival as any nation state would. The fact that it hasn't done much outside of it's own borders has more to do with it being surrounded by 3 bigger imperialist powers than any sort of revolutionary character it's dictator possesses.

As for the second part it's either a revolution or it isn't, if your idea of revolution is shuffling the global capitalist deck then lol

[Leftsolidarity]

North Korea will take any opportunity that will better guarantee it's survival as any nation state would. The fact that it hasn't done much outside of it's own borders has more to do with it being surrounded by 3 bigger imperialist powers than any sort of revolutionary character it's dictator possesses.


This is complete bullshit. You're just making shit up at this point.




As for the second part it's either a revolution or it isn't, if your idea of revolution is shuffling the global capitalist deck then lol

This makes no sense. It was but that doesn't mean the entire world had one at the same time.

[Ethics Gradient, Traitor For All Ages]

Whatever makes life in the wwp easier man :rolleyes:

[Leftsolidarity]

Whatever makes life in the wwp easier man :rolleyes:

The fuck kind of post is this?

[TheGodlessUtopian]

Hey, at least i'm not the moron defending North Korea as on the side of the proletariat. Seriously, you have no room to be condescending.


Imperialism is what the modern nation state exists for, the fact that there are some losers in the process does nothing to change the situation. Fuck your sources, pretend I quoted Lenin or some other idiot you neckbeards adore.

Keeping the flaming classy, I see.

[Leftsolidarity]

Keeping the flaming classy, I see.

You gotta distract from the fact that your politics throw away the concerns of millions of oppressed people facing the biggest imperialist power sitting at their border somehow.

[Brosa Luxemburg]

But it's not and doesn't show any intention to be.

Again, way to gloss over all arguments that show otherwise and state this like it is a fact again.

I can see that debating you is pretty much useless.

[Leftsolidarity]

Again, way to gloss over all arguments that show otherwise and state this like it is a fact again.

I can see that debating you is pretty much useless.

All the other arguments sucked so yeah, ya didn't convince me because I actually give a shit about the struggle against imperialism.

[Brosa Luxemburg]

^How about you respond to the arguments instead of one liners about how our arguments sucked because, well, that is a shitty argument and really a cop-out.

[Leftsolidarity]

^How about you respond to the arguments instead of one liners about how our arguments sucked because, well, that is a shitty argument and really a cop-out.

We didn't just go on for a number of pages through our positions? We kind of went through everything, we just don't agree. It's called political differences. I even said this like a page or 2 ago how I said it seems like everything has been said. If you want to go over everything all over again and run in circles be my guest, I just won't be involved in the discussion.

[Brosa Luxemburg]

http://www.revleft.com/vb/showpost.php?p=2555431&postcount=101

http://www.revleft.com/vb/showpost.php?p=2555448&postcount=104

There you go, the posts you need to respond to. I'll be waiting.

[Brosa Luxemburg]

We didn't just go on for a number of pages through our positions? We kind of went through everything, we just don't agree. It's called political differences. I even said this like a page or 2 ago how I said it seems like everything has been said. If you want to go over everything all over again and run in circles be my guest, I just won't be involved in the discussion.

It's not going in circles. People are responding to some ridiculous things you said, and it seems you can't back your arguments up at this point.

[Leftsolidarity]

It's not going in circles. People are responding to some ridiculous things you said, and it seems you can't back your arguments up at this point.

I did respond to those saying that they were gone over earlier in the thread. I'm not going to waste my time repeating myself every 3 pages cuz you're too lazy to go back and read the discussion.

[Brosa Luxemburg]

At this point, you have not responded to two arguments that me and another user have made, and these arguments cannot simply be answered by "looking back at the thread". We made specific claims with specific evidence as to why what you said was flawed and wrong, and you have not as of yet responded to these posts. I will post them again.

http://www.revleft.com/vb/showpost.php?p=2555448&postcount=104

http://www.revleft.com/vb/showpost.php?p=2555431&postcount=101

[Rugged Collectivist]

I understand why the DPRK is so militaristic. That makes sense. But how do you explain the cult of personality and the weird video about how to cut your hair like a socialist? Imperialism doesn't explain why someone would put a glass box around a bench that Kim Il-Sung once sat on.

You can say it's all western propaganda, and I'm sure a lot of it is, but there have been socialists, some of which post here, that have been there and said it was creepy.

[TheGodlessUtopian]

I understand why the DPRK is so militaristic. That makes sense. But how do you explain the cult of personality and the weird video about how to cut your hair like a socialist? Imperialism doesn't explain why someone would put a glass box around a bench that Kim Il-Sung once sat on.

You can say it's all western propaganda, and I'm sure a lot of it is, but there have been socialists, some of which post here, that have been there and said it was creepy.

I do not think anyone here is attempting to justify the personality cult or any of the other surreal aspects of the North, that isn't part of the conversation; it is part of North Korean society but such is because of what, I think, LS would consider to be the result of Imperialist blockade.

[Leftsolidarity]

I do not think anyone here is attempting to justify the personality cult or any of the other surreal aspects of the North, that isn't part of the conversation; it is part of North Korean society but such is because of what, I think, LS would consider to be the result of Imperialist blockade.

Pretty much. I also don't know where the only part where I said it had contradictions got forgotten.


Also, what's weird about them wanting to preserve a bench? It's kind of neat to know that a historic person and one that fought to liberate their country was there. We have all sorts of things around the founding fathers and other historical bourgeois leaders and that's never brought up but when Koreans do it for people influential in their history it's weird and creepy?

[Brosa Luxemburg]

Also, what's weird about them wanting to preserve a bench? It's kind of neat to know that a historic person and one that fought to liberate their country was there. We have all sorts of things around the founding fathers and other historical bourgeois leaders and that's never brought up but when Koreans do it for people influential in their history it's weird and creepy?

Facepalm

EDIT: So this isn't just a one-liner........

http://www.revleft.com/vb/showpost.php?p=2555038&postcount=91

http://www.revleft.com/vb/showpost.php?p=2555413&postcount=97

[Leftsolidarity]

Facepalm

EDIT: So this isn't just a one-liner........

http://www.revleft.com/vb/showpost.php?p=2555038&postcount=91

http://www.revleft.com/vb/showpost.php?p=2555413&postcount=97

Even if you don't like the person it doesn't mean that them having landmarks for him is weird or creepy. He is a historic figure so I don't see anything to criticize.

[Brosa Luxemburg]

Even if you don't like the person it doesn't mean that them having landmarks for him is weird or creepy. He is a historic figure so I don't see anything to criticize.

I was criticizing you calling him, and I quote, "a historic person and one that fought to liberate their country." Kim Il Sung did no such thing.

[Fruit of Ulysses]

putting a glass box around a bench sat on by a great leader is no less creepy than commemorative benches with peoples names on them that you see on beach piers (at least in southern california) and/or cemeteries.

the imperialist blockade does have something to do with it but not entirely, it does isolate them, which tends to make the people feel more threatened and insular.

But the so-called personality cult cant be understood through a bourgeois western lenze. Their personalities are symbols representing the ideals of the revolution, in an interview with a western journalist a DPRK official said "you dont understand, The Soryong is not an individual." Its specific to the cultural conditions of some Eastern people. Also, adding an emotional attachment to the developers of the guiding philosophy (Juche-Songun) is a means of ensuring that future generations do not stray from its tenets as has happened in other places (China, anyone?). lines like "the immortal line of kim il sung and kim jong il to which all generations of the korean people astutely adhere in defence of the Motherland" are not paens to the personal glory of either men, its an example of how the glorified persons of Kim IL Sung and Kim Jong Il are used to inspire the people to adhere to a belief in and support of socialism. btw, i just made up that line that i used, just for arguments sake. Kim Il Sung in the DPRK is similar to the heritage of Joe Hill that I see as a member of the IWW. Having a face personalizes things, so in a cultural framework where people were conditioned to feel a sense of personal loyalty towards leadership the personalities of leaders are made indistinguishable from the revolutionary concepts they fought for. Its an odd measure to take, exacerbated by the surreal isolation of blockade, but an effective way of preventing counter-revolution.

[Brosa Luxemburg]

@Leftsolidarity

http://www.revleft.com/vb/showpost.php?p=2555756&postcount=133

[Fruit of Ulysses]

BUT KIM IL SUNG DID FIGHT TO LIBERATE THE COUNTRY!!!!!

Hell, I'll admit that the USSR was directly involved in his becoming head of state eventually, but they did so because he was wildly popular and well known despite his youthfull age. Sure he was in Russia at times, but its an historical objective fact that he did have a leadership position in the armed struggle against the Japanese. So even if you say he didnt single handedly win it, he none the less did in fact fight in the conflict and that cannot be disputed, so to say that he "fought to liberate the country" is in fact a true statement.

[Leftsolidarity]

@Leftsolidarity

http://www.revleft.com/vb/showpost.php?p=2555756&postcount=133

Stop just dropping links to your questions over and over again. I don't care and have already answered them.

[Brosa Luxemburg]

No it's not a true statement. He was in Russia the entire time. He wasn't some hero. He didn't directly fight in the war like the likes of other national liberation leaders like Ho Chi Minh, Che Guevara, Castro, etc. He was established and put in power after the fighting. He did not fight to liberate the country, because he didn't fight period. While he held a leadership position, again, he never fought. Other users have brought this up as well.

[Brosa Luxemburg]

Stop just dropping links to your questions over and over again. I don't care and have already answered them.

No you haven't. You haven't made any attempt to answer them. Me and the user made specific claims and specific arguments, and you didn't respond to them.

[Zostrianos]

You gotta distract from the fact that your politics throw away the concerns of millions of oppressed people facing the biggest imperialist power sitting at their border somehow.

The concerns of millions of people oppressed by their own government, not by America. What you're doing is akin to having a hostage situation, where a gunman is holding innocent people at gunpoint, and then you blame the Swat team outside for the hostage's plight, instead of the madman who has the gun to their heads.



Even if you don't like the person it doesn't mean that them having landmarks for him is weird or creepy. He is a historic figure so I don't see anything to criticize.

Hitler was a historical person too, so you wouldn't have a problem with landmarks for him either I gather?

[Leftsolidarity]

The concerns of millions of people oppressed by their own government, not by America. What you're doing is akin to having a hostage situation, where a gunman is holding innocent people at gunpoint, and then you blame the Swat team outside for the hostage's plight, instead of the madman who has the gun to their heads.



Wait. So the big bad man is the leadership of the DPRK and not the biggest imperialist power in the world?






Hitler was a historical person too, so you wouldn't have a problem with landmarks for him either I gather?

lol wut? He's like Hitler now?


This thread is getting more and more ridiculous as it goes on.

[Brosa Luxemburg]

This thread is getting more and more ridiculous as it goes on.

Tell me about it.

http://www.revleft.com/vb/showpost.php?p=2555756&postcount=133

[Zostrianos]

Wait. So the big bad man is the leadership of the DPRK and not the biggest imperialist power in the world?

So you're saying it's America who has concentration camps in North Korea, who forces their people into a cult of personality, who executes or imprisons anyone who tries to leave the country (often with their entire families), who lets most of its people starve while blowing money on megalomaniac projects. America's doing all this? Wow, I didn't know that :rolleyes:

[Brosa Luxemburg]

So you're saying it's America who has concentration camps in North Korea, who forces their people into a cult of personality, who executes or imprisons anyone who tries to leave the country (often with their entire families), who lets most of its people starve while blowing money on megalomaniac projects. America's doing all this? Wow, I didn't know that :rolleyes:

To be fair, U.S. hostility helped give rise to some of these things, but you're right. It is stupid to blame all of this on "imperialism".

[Yazman]

MODERATOR ACTION:

The next person who makes an off-topic post or flames another user is getting infracted. I'm going to clean up all the crap and then start infracting people who post more crap.

Talk about the topic or don't talk at all. If you're not going to contribute substantially to the topic of discussion.... DO NOT POST.

Ethics Gradient, if I see you flame any users on this site again you're getting infracted. Don't do it!

This post is a general warning.

[Sinister Cultural Marxist]

Leftsolidarity - I think I have already addressed your reasons why the DRPK is a "worker's state". I said that there was no proletarian revolution in North Korea and it was Soviet Red Army which kicked the Japanese out of Korea, not the so-called "guerrillas" of Kim il-Sung. As other posters pointed out, there is no parallel with actual Marxist-Leninist guerrilla leaders like Ho Chih Mihn or Castro. Those people actually drove out the colonial bourgeoisie of their country by force - later supported by the USSR of course, but initially home-grown.

Of course, leftist and bourgeois republics alike revere revolutionary figures, much as Russia did as well as China, but only the DPRK has seen a despotism based on family and military rule arise in such a naked fashion. That is why I don't feel that they should be classified as a "worker's state", and while it seems reasonable to argue that American actions towards the DPRK are bad from an anti-Imperialist perspective, that doesn't mean we should give their regime more credit than its worth.



But the so-called personality cult cant be understood through a bourgeois western lenze. Their personalities are symbols representing the ideals of the revolution, in an interview with a western journalist a DPRK official said "you dont understand, The Soryong is not an individual." Its specific to the cultural conditions of some Eastern people.

I know Orientalism is still totally a fad and all, but let's drop this absurd notion. Japan, China, Taiwan, Vietnam, Mongolia and South Korea all have cults around certain historical figures but none to the same degree! Yes, ancient Chinese, Japanese and Korean emperors were seen as God-like figures with heavenly approval, but those are the kinds of social constructs which socialist revolution should overcome, not strengthen (not to mention, all other Asian nations dropped such regimes by 1945 with the Japanese emperor rejecting his Godhood). Market-based commerce is a part of the cultural conditions of people all over the world, does that mean that Communism should endorse the marketplace as the central component of the regime???

Being East-Asian does not make one necessarily accept cult politics etc any more than being Russian, American, Polish or Indian.


Also, adding an emotional attachment to the developers of the guiding philosophy (Juche-Songun) is a means of ensuring that future generations do not stray from its tenets as has happened in other places (China, anyone?). lines like "the immortal line of kim il sung and kim jong il to which all generations of the korean people astutely adhere in defence of the Motherland" are not paens to the personal glory of either men, its an example of how the glorified persons of Kim IL Sung and Kim Jong Il are used to inspire the people to adhere to a belief in and support of socialism. btw, i just made up that line that i used, just for arguments sake. Kim Il Sung in the DPRK is similar to the heritage of Joe Hill that I see as a member of the IWW. Having a face personalizes things, so in a cultural framework where people were conditioned to feel a sense of personal loyalty towards leadership the personalities of leaders are made indistinguishable from the revolutionary concepts they fought for. Its an odd measure to take, exacerbated by the surreal isolation of blockade, but an effective way of preventing counter-revolution.Does the IWW glorify and empower one particular family across generations?