North Korea showing its racist infantile side again [Archive]

Tim Cornelis

27th December 2014, 15:02

I'm not sure if this needs to still be pointed out, but North Korea is a far-right Korean ethnic nationalist regime. I don't mean this hyperbolically and I'm probably the last person to abuse words like fascism (I'm not calling the DPRK fascist by the way, although it's close). It has a highly stratified society with what amounts to an inverted caste system called songbun where ancestry determines social status; it has rampant sexism and it pursues ethnic nationalist policies like forcing abortions on repatriated women fearing interracial children and thus muddling blood and pureness of the Korean people.

I'd also like to point out the similarities between Tankies and white nationalists. Many white nationalists support Novorossiya, Belarus, have some sympathy for Iran, North Korea, as do Tankies.

Asero

27th December 2014, 15:18

I'm always amazed at people expressing so much solidarity to blatantly revisionist regimes. It's truly amazing.

Vladimir Innit Lenin

27th December 2014, 16:30

Sadly, given the popular mis-conception that 'Communism' = the social systems that prevail in places like North Korea, China, and Cuba, it seems as though we do need to keep pointing out that Marxist or other communist analyses of society do not necessarily lead to the sorts of social systems that occur in these countries.

Zealot

27th December 2014, 16:36

Not a supporter of North Korea but here's my "tankie defence":

1) The Mirror? Seriously?

2) I can't find a single source for the statements. Billions of news articles are using each other as sources for the same statements, claiming that they were released by KCNA. I've looked for a while on KCNA's website and can't find anything remotely comparable to said statements.

3) The English is slightly different from that used by whoever edits the KCNA articles.

4) Even if true, they were making an analogy comparing Obama's recklessness to a monkey in a forest. It states that Obama is reckless in words and deeds like a monkey in a tropical forest. It's an unfortunate analogy given that comparisons of black people with monkeys is definitely a known racist comment in English-speaking countries. So in reality, it would really just be the West reflecting its own racism and blaming North Korea.

STALINwasntSTALLIN

27th December 2014, 16:37

I'd also like to point out the similarities between Tankies and white nationalists. Many white nationalists support Novorossiya, Belarus, have some sympathy for Iran, North Korea, as do Tankies.

Although I am not a Tankie, I still support Novorossiya. The Ukrainian "Revolution" was nothing more than a CIA coup engineered with the fascist Svoboda party. This reactionary Ukrainian movement went around destroying statues of Lenin and would have undoubtedly began massacring minorities if not for the Novorossiya revolution.

Although I do not approve of Iran's current government, I wholeheartedly support their cause against the savage imperialism of the West. The United States does not care about the average Iranian's "freedom" but is instead pushes for war in order to absorb Iran into the capitalist order.

As an aside, I am not a Tankie because most of Eastern Europe was infected by Khrushchevite revisionism. The only country to resist this poison was Enver Hoxha's Albania. As matter of fact the only good thing Khrushchev did was crush the fascist coup engineered by the CIA in Hungary.

Sabot Cat

27th December 2014, 16:40

Even if true, they were making an analogy comparing Obama's recklessness to a monkey in a forest. It states that Obama is reckless in words and deeds like a monkey in a tropical forest. It's an unfortunate analogy given that comparisons of black people with monkeys is definitely a known racist comment in English-speaking countries. So in reality, it would really just be the West reflecting its own racism and blaming North Korea.

I'd buy that if they didn't call him this with racist connotations before.

"Park made waste water-like reckless remarks slandering the DPRK's line on simultaneously developing two fronts after inviting her American master reminiscent of a wicked black monkey to visit south Korea on April 25."

http://www.kcna.co.jp/item/2014/201405/news02/20140502-22ee.html

Sasha

27th December 2014, 16:55

I am not a Tankie.

....

As matter of fact the only good thing Khrushchev did was crush the fascist coup engineered by the CIA in Hungary.

:lol:

You do know that support of the supression of the Hungarian uprising is the original definition of the term Tankie?

STALINwasntSTALLIN

27th December 2014, 17:08

:lol:

You do know that support of the supression of the Hungarian uprising is the original definition of the term Tankie?

What I meant was that I do not support the spread of communism through the armies of Khrushchev and his Revisionist ilk. I do, however, support the suppression of all fascist coups including the Hungarian "Revolution" of 1956. In the end Khrushchevite Revisionist pseudo-Communists governing Hungary is far superior to a CIA/Arrow Party/Jobbik fascist government. You would agree would you not?

jullia

27th December 2014, 17:17

Nationalism alway go with racism. I notice that even in some small communist nationalist movements, there are always a form of racism inside.

Ravn

27th December 2014, 17:24

Tim Cornelis

27th December 2014, 17:25

Although I am not a Tankie, I still support Novorossiya. The Ukrainian "Revolution" was nothing more than a CIA coup engineered with the fascist Svoboda party. This reactionary Ukrainian movement went around destroying statues of Lenin and would have undoubtedly began massacring minorities if not for the Novorossiya revolution.

Although I do not approve of Iran's current government, I wholeheartedly support their cause against the savage imperialism of the West. The United States does not care about the average Iranian's "freedom" but is instead pushes for war in order to absorb Iran into the capitalist order.

As an aside, I am not a Tankie because most of Eastern Europe was infected by Khrushchevite revisionism. The only country to resist this poison was Enver Hoxha's Albania. As matter of fact the only good thing Khrushchev did was crush the fascist coup engineered by the CIA in Hungary.

You're not a 'Tankie' since you're consistent in Stalinist nonsense, how laudable. I have no particular interest in debating with these people whose Marxism is based on second hand uniformed distortions of the Marxist method. Support for bourgeois regimes, theocracy, fascism, it really doesn't matter to the Stalinist as long as it bugs Western powers. I've explained elsewhere how Stalinism has inverted the materialist method and the absurdities that this produces guiding their politics. See here another example.

It's ironic that you oppose the "fascist coup" in Hungary lead by democratic socialists, and some communists here and there, as well as liberals, yet you support Alexander Dugin's political project. Fascism isn't problematic it seems, only when it suits you.

Of course, this nonsense about "engineering coups" is utter Tankie nonsense that is not and cannot be corroborated by historical research. You entertain illusions.

Well, while all you clowns jerk off about racist slurs, has it ever occurred to you that Obama could care less? He may have no problem self-identifying himself as a wicked black monkey.

Wow. Analogously, and since Africans sometimes call each other niggers it's not problematic if I do it -- in fact this argument makes more sense than yours. See here the Stalinoid defence: calling a black person a black monkey is fine since he might as well self-identify as such. I suppose this is why Stalinist numbers thin out on RevLeft, their apologism for sexism and racism and sexist and racist regimes like North Korea and the USSR inevitably surfaces from time to time. If I ever find myself deskpalming one too many times at Stalinist idiocy all I have to do is make a thread about the USSRs campaign in Eastern Europe or the DPRKs racism and sexism and banned they are.

Stalinists apparently are:
1) Apologists for sexism and racism when convenient
2) Support fascism when convenient
3) Counter-revolutionary always, 'hasta la contrarrevolución siempre' the rallying cry of the Stalinist.
Scum. Ravn you are utter scum. Be gone Great Satan of the Left Wing of Capital.

Geiseric

27th December 2014, 17:32

Crabbensmasher

27th December 2014, 18:07

:lol:

You do know that support of the supression of the Hungarian uprising is the original definition of the term Tankie?

I always thought tankie was just another word for 'anti-revisionist' stalinists? What's the actual meaning of the word and how is it used on this forum?

Tim Cornelis

27th December 2014, 18:17

I hate to look like I'm on the same side as the stalinists but its despicable how NK is misrepresented by yhe bourgeois media. Its a country that has been invaded by several imperialist powers, so I dont see how spreading sensationalist tabloids is actually helping the political situation. Also the English invented racism as we know it, and I doubt they even understand the connotation by using "monkey" as a racist slur since there are not many black people in Korea.

Have you all considered that we might be lied to about a very poor county which the US definitely wants as a military base? Do you all know that "the interview" was directly funded by a CIA think tank? (No pun intended) do you know the definition of "black propaganda"? Such as the NYT saying "North Vietnam massacres 100,000 civilians in latest offensive" or "saddam hussein has nuclear weapons"?

Many countries have been subject to military imperialist ventures, I'm not sure what your point is. Sensationalist untruths are circulated in the media on relatively frequent basis, but crimes established through rigorous investigation are often similar or worse. To be clear, I don't mean that as 'then it's okay to lie since it might as well have been true' I mean this as saying that the label "despicable" is an overstatement as the media rarely reports on these well-established crimes such as forced abortions.

I think saying that they doubt the connotation is a bit naive. The whole world is more interconnected than ever. Of course they know the connotation. Racist tirades fit perfectly in the Korean supremacist ideological framework for the DPRK. The regime is obsessed with racial purity of the Korean people and promotes this image universally. Americans and Japanese are represented as viler and (borderline) evil without discriminating class and foreign characters are portrayed as inferior even when friendly (see their portrayal at WFDY festival). Moreover, foreign residents in the DPRK are (virtually) exclusively married to other foreigners. Given all this, it makes perfect sense that they would attack Obama in racist tirades. And of course, as pointed out this can hardly be said to have "circulated through sensationalist media" when they have posted it on their official news website (the previous racist tirade at least).

I'm not sure how your second paragraph is related to the first, unless for deflecting, which would hint at subtle apologism for racism.

Tim Cornelis

27th December 2014, 18:20

I always thought tankie was just another word for 'anti-revisionist' stalinists? What's the actual meaning of the word and how is it used on this forum?

Tankie original meaning: 'hardline' Stalinists that supported the invasion of Hungary and an ideological framework that would justify this. In other words, 'Kruchevists' and 'Brezhnevists'.

Tankie evolved meaning: individuals obsessed with Soviet paraphernalia and aesthetics that genuinely think the USSR was a Communist state and haven't read Marxist literature.

They are often used both, a bit confusing, and for people that are between the two definitions.

Vladimir Innit Lenin

27th December 2014, 18:26

It's an unfortunate analogy given that comparisons of black people with monkeys is definitely a known racist comment in English-speaking countries.

No, it's not 'unfortunate', it's comparing a man to a monkey because of the colour of his skin.

Unless you think a state government is so incompetent that they would allow such an oversight to happen in an internationally-released statement.

Presumably it was unfortunate when they called South Korea's President a 'prostitute' this year, too, or when they previously called Obama a monkey. Unfortunate twice, that's what it must be. :rolleyes:

So to summarise yes, you are a tankie and yes, you are apologising for racism.

RedWorker

27th December 2014, 18:37

Clarification of why it's known to be racist:

Although the 'monkey' comment is racist, we cannot infer it is from this comment alone. For instance, the DPRK is constantly comparing everything it doesn't like to animals; 'imperialist dogs', and so on, is the standard. This could be said to be racist in the sense that it is saying some animals (humans) are superior to others (dogs). But their statements about Obama are racist in the sense of 'Korean' superior to 'black'. Yet we cannot determine this from merely one comment comparing him to a monkey, due to the DPRK's tendency to use animals as racism in the earlier sense, not the latter sense. For example, although the comment alone gives a suggestion that this was done because Obama is black (but it cannot be ultimately determined from the comment alone), it could very well be that they'd also call other white state leaders 'monkeys', given how often they're comparing humans they don't like with other animals. But they do not do this, they only do it with Obama.

Since we know the DPRK has a history of racism, as well as attacking foreign state leaders with discrimination in general, we know they are making this comment in the latter racist sense, not the earlier. Well, actually it's in both senses.

STALINwasntSTALLIN

27th December 2014, 18:43

Don't Swallow The Cap

27th December 2014, 19:42

Geeze, I feel like some of you would support a pile of shit just because it was red.

Something racist was said by a regime know for saying/doing racist shit.
They don't really deserve the benefit of doubt if you ask me.

Futility Personified

27th December 2014, 21:11

Why would anyone doubt that they've said this again, seeing as they've said it previously? NK touts ethnic superiority. What we're seeing is the collage of acceptable reasons to have an intervention at some point in the future. Will it be a good thing? It'll be new boss, same as the old boss, and loads of people will die. The absence of anyone on the world stage who will promote a socialist intervention (what would constitute that is for another thread though) means that the only sensible line is: avoid contributing to the jingoism that will eventually result in loads of innocent people being killed by imperialism. Fuck the ruling class of NK and all countries.

In real terms what does that translate to? Well, i'm buggered if I know apart from pointing out western hypocrisy and stocking up apocalypse beans in the cupboard.

G4b3n

27th December 2014, 21:21

And I just got done reading Mao's piece on the urging for the liberation of blacks in 1960-1970s America. Way to turn this study session into a bummer. :(

Sinister Cultural Marxist

28th December 2014, 02:18

One can simultaneously oppose America's attempts to impose a particular economic and political order on the Korean peninsula, and oppose the DPRK's regime as onerous, racist, oppressive and exploitative.

Zealot

28th December 2014, 14:36

I'd buy that if they didn't call him this with racist connotations before.

"Park made waste water-like reckless remarks slandering the DPRK's line on simultaneously developing two fronts after inviting her American master reminiscent of a wicked black monkey to visit south Korea on April 25."

http://www.kcna.co.jp/item/2014/201405/news02/20140502-22ee.html

No, it's not 'unfortunate', it's comparing a man to a monkey because of the colour of his skin.

Unless you think a state government is so incompetent that they would allow such an oversight to happen in an internationally-released statement.

Presumably it was unfortunate when they called South Korea's President a 'prostitute' this year, too, or when they previously called Obama a monkey. Unfortunate twice, that's what it must be. :rolleyes:

So to summarise yes, you are a tankie and yes, you are apologising for racism.

Well, I'm still not convinced. For a few reasons. I've lived in Asia for close to 10 years and know a thing or two about the culture over here. In many Asian cultures, monkeys have a reputation for being cunning tricksters that deceive people and land themselves in hot water for their ways.

There's a well-known proverb over here: "even monkeys fall from trees". It basically means that even experts make mistakes, usually in the context of someone being overconfident. It's a reference to monkeys, the expert climbers, who fall from trees when they become too confident of their abilities and, thus, reckless. I believe this could be what the North Koreans are talking about when speaking of Obama as a reckless monkey. So it was unfortunate in that it doesn't translate well into English/the Western mind where monkey would be a racial slur for someone that happens to be black.

Anyone that has read a KCNA article would quickly realise that they use a lot of lingo that simply doesn't translate into English. There are a lot of things we can criticise North Korea about but the evidence for racism being one of them is rather weak from what I can see.

Even the very concept of race and racism is radically different in Asia. Probably because it is largely a product of western culture and history. For instance, in Vietnam you see women covering up head to toe despite the humid temperature. That's because white skin is considered beautiful and black skin is not (as it is in many other parts of Asia). I found this to be downright racist. A woman from the countryside, who had a dark complexion herself, told me the reason for this. Back in the day, only the upper-class were white and everyone else was dark from toiling in the fields. So being white made you stand-out and made you appear wealthy and educated. In other words, it was more about class than race.

So in conclusion, you're the tankie. Or should I say, a reverse-tankie that wants to use weak evidence from tabloid articles to impose western views and lexicon on another culture that simply wouldn't see things the same way. Well how racist of you.

And yes, I do happen to think that North Korea's "state government is so incompetent". I mean, do I really have to do defend this view, lol? Just look at KCNA's website. They can't even afford an editor for their articles and "internationally-released statements".

RedWorker

28th December 2014, 15:05

Yeah, go fuck yourself with your apologism for racism. You probably know nothing about the systematical racism and ethnic nationalism in North Korea, do you? Tankie.

By the way, this article (http://kcna.co.jp/calendar/2014/05/05-02/2014-0502-020.html) calls Obama a "clown," "dirty fellow" and somebody who "does not even have the basic appearances of a human being". They say that he is "reminiscent of a wicked black monkey" and "should live as a monkey in an African natural zoo, licking the breadcrumbs thrown by spectators." As well as calling him a "crossbreed with unclear blood". An alternate translation talks about "hybrid bloodlines".

Comrade #138672

28th December 2014, 15:08

Are we really going to play the "I am not a racist, you are the racist" game here? The racism of North-Korea is inexcusable.

motion denied

28th December 2014, 15:13

They at least got the "clown" part right.

Zealot

28th December 2014, 15:43

Yeah, go fuck yourself with your apologism for racism. You probably know nothing about the systematical racism and ethnic nationalism in North Korea, do you? Tankie.

No, actually, I didn't know much about the ethnic nationalism so thanks for bringing that to my attention. Probably because, being the great tankie that I am, I actually don't give a shit about North Korea to research things like that. I only raise my voice when I read something that sounds like obvious bs. I can find homophobic and sexist rants in KCNA articles but, again I repeat, the evidence for racist tirades is pretty scant. I'm willing to take back everything I've said thus far if someone can provide sources and quotes that are definitively not poor translations or cultural misunderstandings.

But systematical racism? That doesn't really make sense given that there's no one to be racist against in North Korea - apart from a few foreign diplomats I could probably count on one hand.

By the way, this article (http://kcna.co.jp/calendar/2014/05/05-02/2014-0502-020.html) calls Obama a "clown," "dirty fellow" and somebody who "does not even have the basic appearances of a human being". They say that he is "reminiscent of a wicked black monkey" and "should live as a monkey in an African natural zoo, licking the breadcrumbs thrown by spectators." As well as calling him a "crossbreed with unclear blood". An alternate translation talks about "hybrid bloodlines".

Is that what Google translate said? Because the whole thing is in Korean.

RedWorker

28th December 2014, 16:06

But systematical racism? That doesn't really make sense given that there's no one to be racist against in North Korea - apart from a few foreign diplomats I could probably count on one hand.

Which is the very point - North Korea has been pursuing extreme ethnic nationalist policies in order to ensure the "true Korean bloodline" is preserved.

Is that what Google translate said? Because the whole thing is in Korean.

Several foreign newspapers translated it. In any case, it'd be a very big coincidence that a translator was producing such elaborate racist sentences when the original text had nothing to do with it.

jullia

28th December 2014, 16:32

I really don't understand how you can have a debate if calling somebody a monkey is racist or not...

Tim Cornelis

28th December 2014, 17:33

An ethnic supremacist regime calling an interracial black man a monkey and a dirty halfbreed.... is that really racist now?

STALINwasntSTALLIN

28th December 2014, 18:26

Let me first and foremost say I completely and utterly oppose and abhor racism in any and all forms. I think what North Korea said was racist and wrong. That being said we should not lose sight of the bigger picture. Much of the capitalist press ranging from the pseudo-left Guardian to the openly reactionary Daily Mail expressed faux outrage over this racist remark. Why would the bigoted Daily Mail which has dedicated countless articles to racist fear mongering over immigration suddenly become over North Korea comparing a black man to a monkey? It is simply because the bourgeoisie press is following the warmongering dictates of its capitalist masters. The Western Imperialist powers need to demonize North Korea in order to strengthen their position in East Asia.

As for North Korea, I will be the first one to admit it is not perfect. This was due in large part to the Revisionist poison introduced by Khrushchev. Yet I would be wrong if I did not point out that North Korea was founded under the guidance of Stalin. As such, it is still in many ways a communist state and my party the U.S. Marxist-Leninist Organization wrote several articles defending them from American imperialism. I would link to them, but I have not been here long enough to post links. So I will just leave the titles in case anyone wants to oogle them:

Support Korean Reunification! Normalize Relations with the DPRK

Vigorously Support the Reunification of Korea!

Salute the Struggle of the Korean People for Reunification

North Korea: A Convenient “Threat” for U.S.-Japan Alliance

Salute 1953 Victory of the Korean People

Vindication of DPRK at UN Security Council

USMLO Conveys Condolences on the Passing of Kim Jong Il

As an aside, Workers Vanguard also published several articles defending North Korea:

Defend North Korean Deformed Workers State!

Defend North Korea!

I guess a Trotskyite is a Stalinist clinging to their last bit of liberalism.

Futility Personified

28th December 2014, 18:38

You just have to be a troll. If you aren't serious, and people of your calibre still have a presence in socialist activity in this day and age, we practically deserve to be extinct.

Take your fruity little cult nonsense and bugger off. Don't clog up the forum with that pointless trite.

Sabot Cat

28th December 2014, 18:51

Well, I'm still not convinced. For a few reasons. I've lived in Asia for close to 10 years and know a thing or two about the culture over here. In many Asian cultures, monkeys have a reputation for being cunning tricksters that deceive people and land themselves in hot water for their ways.

There's a well-known proverb over here: "even monkeys fall from trees". It basically means that even experts make mistakes, usually in the context of someone being overconfident. It's a reference to monkeys, the expert climbers, who fall from trees when they become too confident of their abilities and, thus, reckless. I believe this could be what the North Koreans are talking about when speaking of Obama as a reckless monkey. So it was unfortunate in that it doesn't translate well into English/the Western mind where monkey would be a racial slur for someone that happens to be black.

But why a 'wicked black monkey'? Also, monkeys have cultural connotations for being tricksters here as well, so I'm not even sure of the relevancy of bringing it up.

Anyone that has read a KCNA article would quickly realise that they use a lot of lingo that simply doesn't translate into English. There are a lot of things we can criticise North Korea about but the evidence for racism being one of them is rather weak from what I can see.

No, it's crystal clear, and they've stood by their racist phrases even after people repeatedly called attention to them.

Even the very concept of race and racism is radically different in Asia. Probably because it is largely a product of western culture and history. For instance, in Vietnam you see women covering up head to toe despite the humid temperature. That's because white skin is considered beautiful and black skin is not (as it is in many other parts of Asia). I found this to be downright racist. A woman from the countryside, who had a dark complexion herself, told me the reason for this. Back in the day, only the upper-class were white and everyone else was dark from toiling in the fields. So being white made you stand-out and made you appear wealthy and educated. In other words, it was more about class than race.

Yes, one could make a similar rationalization of racism in the Western world. All this proves is that 'black monkey' is just as derogatory when a Korean is saying it.

So in conclusion, you're the tankie. Or should I say, a reverse-tankie that wants to use weak evidence from tabloid articles

My source was the KCNA, and I provided a link to it too.

to impose western views and lexicon on another culture that simply wouldn't see things the same way.

You yourself acknowledged that racism exists in this culture, and you seem to not understand that North Koreans can pick up on concepts from other cultures too- like the racist ones.

Well how racist of you.

Do you know what's racist? Spending 418 words defending a national news outlet which called a black man a monkey.

And yes, I do happen to think that North Korea's "state government is so incompetent". I mean, do I really have to do defend this view, lol? Just look at KCNA's website. They can't even afford an editor for their articles and "internationally-released statements".

The KCNA has been forced to acknowledge the racist nature of these remarks. They don't care, because this is no 'mistake'.

Ravn

28th December 2014, 19:19

Well, while all you clowns jerk off about racist slurs, has it ever occurred to you that Obama could care less? He may have no problem self-identifying himself as a wicked black monkey.

Tim Cornelis: Wow. Analogously, and since Africans sometimes call each other niggers it's not problematic if I do it -- in fact this argument makes more sense than yours. See here the Stalinoid defence: calling a black person a black monkey is fine since he might as well self-identify as such. I suppose this is why Stalinist numbers thin out on RevLeft, their apologism for sexism and racism and sexist and racist regimes like North Korea and the USSR inevitably surfaces from time to time. If I ever find myself deskpalming one too many times at Stalinist idiocy all I have to do is make a thread about the USSRs campaign in Eastern Europe or the DPRKs racism and sexism and banned they are.

Stalinists apparently are:
1) Apologists for sexism and racism when convenient
2) Support fascism when convenient
3) Counter-revolutionary always, 'hasta la contrarrevolución siempre' the rallying cry of the Stalinist.
Scum. Ravn you are utter scum. Be gone Great Satan of the Left Wing of Capital.

Well, I guess it's not OK to call people here clowns. That's a hell of reaction to what I actually said. But it kind of proves that this is a circus. Where did I say up there that it was OK to call this guy a wicked black monkey--with a racist intent behind it? All I said was that he probably could care less. & where did I not acknowledge that there was a racist intent involve with these remarks that got you all up in arms? You conveniently ignored me saying that: "[The North Koreans] have their own racist nuances operating there". I guess what I should have done was get in line & spank these guys for Western sins because you assume that I suffer from white guilt. Come on. Not everybody's white. You can't see the forest because of the trees. The imperialists want to take down the North Korean regime. It doesn't follow that from making that observation that I uphold that regime as ideal nor not acknowledging its internal contradictions. What about that, smart-guy?

consuming negativity

28th December 2014, 19:32

Even the very concept of race and racism is radically different in Asia. Probably because it is largely a product of western culture and history. For instance, in Vietnam you see women covering up head to toe despite the humid temperature. That's because white skin is considered beautiful and black skin is not (as it is in many other parts of Asia). I found this to be downright racist. A woman from the countryside, who had a dark complexion herself, told me the reason for this. Back in the day, only the upper-class were white and everyone else was dark from toiling in the fields. So being white made you stand-out and made you appear wealthy and educated. In other words, it was more about class than race.

Actually this is exactly the same as it is/was in Europe. To a tee. It has nothing to do with racism against black persons, although this bias against dark-skinned black persons does exist in Western culture and is definitely racist, but rather what we're referring to here is classist. Having pale skin was a status symbol of being wealthy back when everybody worked outside in the fields except the people who lived in the manor and didn't do an honest day's work in their entire life. Nowadays, it is reversed, and white people will actually pay to go to tanning salons to get rid of their pale skin. Why? Probably for a variety of reasons. First and foremost among them being that tan skin is no longer associated with work, but rather, since most white people work indoors, it is associated with leisure. Going on vacation to the beach, or just laying around in the sun drinking a martini are the sorts of images conjured up. And these things are, of course, much easier for people with lots of money and time on their hands. Thorstein Veblen noted the existence of conspicuous leisure and conspicuous consumption as a sociological phenomenon over 100 years ago, with his main example being the one you claim is limited to only Asia. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conspicuous_leisure)

Zealot

28th December 2014, 19:35

Which is the very point - North Korea has been pursuing extreme ethnic nationalist policies in order to ensure the "true Korean bloodline" is preserved.

I thought it was because North Korea was a totalitarian state that doesn't want foreign influence coming through the border to make the citizens ask questions about their government. I stand corrected.

Several foreign newspapers translated it. In any case, it'd be a very big coincidence that a translator was producing such elaborate racist sentences when the original text had nothing to do with it.

From what I've been able to work out, the entire basis of this translation rests on an article by the Washington Post, who in turn based it on a partial translation posted by a right-wing American blogger with a pro-South Korean agenda, who in turn received the translation from a South Korean scholar with pro-imperialist views, who (partially) translated a KCNA article that was describing the views of workers interviewed by KCNA. According to the Washington Post, the article almost "escaped foreign attention". So apparently South Korean news agencies didn't see this as anything worthy of writing about on their English websites.

You almost had me ready to withdraw my "tankie defences" but damn son you're clutching at straws with this one.

I really don't understand how you can have a debate if calling somebody a monkey is racist or not...

Except that's not the debate. The debate is whether or not that was the intention.

Sabot Cat: your ignorance, strawman arguments and red herrings aren't worth responding to.

Zealot

28th December 2014, 19:48

Actually this is exactly the same as it is/was in Europe. To a tee. It has nothing to do with racism against black persons, although this bias against dark-skinned black persons does exist in Western culture and is definitely racist, but rather what we're referring to here is classist. Having pale skin was a status symbol of being wealthy back when everybody worked outside in the fields except the people who lived in the manor and didn't do an honest day's work in their entire life. Nowadays, it is reversed, and white people will actually pay to go to tanning salons to get rid of their pale skin. Why? Probably for a variety of reasons. First and foremost among them being that tan skin is no longer associated with work, but rather, since most white people work indoors, it is associated with leisure. Going on vacation to the beach, or just laying around in the sun drinking a martini are the sorts of images conjured up. And these things are, of course, much easier for people with lots of money and time on their hands. Thorstein Veblen noted the existence of conspicuous leisure and conspicuous consumption as a sociological phenomenon over 100 years ago, with his main example being the one you claim is limited to only Asia. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conspicuous_leisure)

That is interesting. I also assume that this was probably the origins of racism in Europe also, I'm not saying it's limited to Asia but this conception does seem to be more prevalent there. For instance, how many people in the Western world actually hate on blacks in preference to their own color for the reason that they don't want to be seen as a lower-class peasant? Not many, I presume. I think racism probably took on a particularly nasty form in Europe and America because of the colonial legacy.

Vladimir Innit Lenin

28th December 2014, 22:22

From what I've been able to work out, the entire basis of this translation rests on an article by the Washington Post, who in turn based it on a partial translation posted by a right-wing American blogger with a pro-South Korean agenda, who in turn received the translation from a South Korean scholar with pro-imperialist views, who (partially) translated a KCNA article that was describing the views of workers interviewed by KCNA. According to the Washington Post, the article almost "escaped foreign attention". So apparently South Korean news agencies didn't see this as anything worthy of writing about on their English websites.

Wow, you've really gone to a lot of effort to make it appear possible that every single news outlet in the world, bar the KCNA, can't make a basic language-to-language translation.

I mean, do you really think that professional journalists and editors would allow such a sensational story to be published without checking the authenticity of the source and accuracy of the translation?

You're excuses for racism are really pathetic. I wish you could see this without the rose-tinted glasses right now.

RedWorker

28th December 2014, 22:39

I mean, do you really think that professional journalists and editors would allow such a sensational story to be published without checking the authenticity of the source and accuracy of the translation?

Though this sounds nice, considering the facts it is actually a ridiculous statement. The bourgeois media, even what people say is its 'most respectable' section, has proven time and time again to deliver the most manipulated crap, when not false, when not outright fabrications. When the topic is North Korea, it is common - a recent example is the 'person ate by 300 dogs' story, which was published even by these 'most respectable' newspapers, and after investigation was proven to have in fact originated from a joke a Chinese humorist's blog.

Sasha

28th December 2014, 22:39

Well, I guess it's not OK to call people here clowns. That's a hell of reaction to what I actually said. But it kind of proves that this is a circus. Where did I say up there that it was OK to call this guy a wicked black monkey--with a racist intent behind it? All I said was that he probably could care less. & where did I not acknowledge that there was a racist intent involve with these remarks that got you all up in arms? You conveniently ignored me saying that: "[The North Koreans] have their own racist nuances operating there". I guess what I should have done was get in line & spank these guys for Western sins because you assume that I suffer from white guilt. Come on. Not everybody's white. You can't see the forest because of the trees. The imperialists want to take down the North Korean regime. It doesn't follow that from making that observation that I uphold that regime as ideal nor not acknowledging its internal contradictions. What about that, smart-guy?

hey RAVN, could you please refrain from the online equivalent of shouting at people?
the bold function is there to emphasis an important part of a sentence.
also the request to pick a different color than red if you do have to emphasize something within what you already bolded. Red bold is used on this board by the admins to break in on discussion with important administrative action.
thanx...

RedWorker

28th December 2014, 22:47

While I couldn't care less about red bold, this should be a bigger worry for this site's administrators:

Well, while all you clowns jerk off about racist slurs, has it ever occurred to you that Obama could care less? He may have no problem self-identifying himself as a wicked black monkey.

Ravn

29th December 2014, 02:34

While I couldn't care less about red bold, this should be a bigger worry for this site's administrators:

Actually, it's Euro ethno-centricism they need to worry about. Ever heard of Hanuman, for example?
"The one who is swift as mind? The one who has a speed equal to the wind God? The one who has complete control of his senses? The one who is the repository of incomparable strength?"

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

Not everybody has a low opinion of monkeys. & not everybody comes from your culture.

http://www.zbrushcentral.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=308743

Creative Destruction

29th December 2014, 03:11

Yeah, I'm sure NK's propaganda outlet had that in mind when they called Obama a "monkey."

Stalinists are the worst.

Sabot Cat

29th December 2014, 03:14

Actually, it's Euro ethno-centricism they need to worry about. Ever heard of Hanuman, for example?
"The one who is swift as mind? The one who has a speed equal to the wind God? The one who has complete control of his senses? The one who is the repository of incomparable strength?"

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

Not everybody has a low opinion of monkeys. & not everybody comes from your culture.

Hanuman is Indian, not Korean.

Comrade Ethnocentricism seems to not understand that there are different Asian cultures...

Ravn

29th December 2014, 03:27

Hanuman is Indian, not Korean.

Comrade Ethnocentricism seems to not understand that there are different Asian cultures...

Comrade Clueless, the point was, regard for monkeys is not universal.

Redistribute the Rep

29th December 2014, 03:36

Nowadays, it is reversed, and white people will actually pay to go to tanning salons to get rid of their pale skin. Why? Probably for a variety of reasons. First and foremost among them being that tan skin is no longer associated with work, but rather, since most white people work indoors, it is associated with leisure. Going on vacation to the beach, or just laying around in the sun drinking a martini are the sorts of images conjured up.

The trend was started by Coco Chanel when she came back from France accidentally suntanned. Josephine Baker was also popular at the time in Paris and people liked her darker skin. Tanned skin became associated with wealth because of them, so you're right that it can be class based.

Ravn

29th December 2014, 03:37

Yeah, I'm sure NK's propaganda outlet had that in mind when they called Obama a "monkey."

Stalinists are the worst.

That's irrelevant to the point that is being made here. Not every culture has a disregard for monkeys.

& consider that North Korean racism directed at African people has less effect on African people than the racism against African people that has came from & continues from the West. It's Western cultural bias that has predominated in the assessment of this particular issue here A lot of people here are very intransigent to acknowledge these contradictions.

Also, consider your disregard for Stalinists to be equally unbalanced & informed by bias.

Sabot Cat

29th December 2014, 03:38

Comrade Clueless, the point was, regard for monkeys is not universal.

Except the cultural connotations here are clearly negative when paired with adjectives like 'wicked' or being used in reference to enemies.

Korean ethnic nationalism is also clearly a thing, and a problem for the entire peninsular population, not just the DPRK; racially derogatory remarks like these are a manifestation of its prevalence there.

That's irrelevant to the point that is being made here. Not every culture has a disregard for monkeys.

The North Korean culture, or at least the one permeating the ruling clique in question here, clearly has a disregard for black people, which is the real object of discussion.

STALINwasntSTALLIN

29th December 2014, 03:50

Yeah, I'm sure NK's propaganda outlet had that in mind when they called Obama a "monkey."

Stalinists are the worst.

As a proud Stalinist I am offended by that comment. As far as North Korea, I will be the first one to admit that there is most likely racist connotations in likening Obama to a monkey. At the same time, however, it should be noted that in many East Asian cultures a monkey is seen as a trickster and so North Korea might (but not certainly) be implying that Obama is behaving in a tricky and treacherous manner.

On a lighter note, here are two relevant cartoons from Great Moments in Leftism. I cannot post the links yet so just Google:

Great Moments in Leftism: Meanwhile in Pyongyang

Great Moments in Leftism: Revolutionary Racism

Atsumari

29th December 2014, 03:51

Fuck, I missed the golden opportunity to inflate my rep with low hanging fruit.

I am very curious what Ravn and the other North Korea apologists has to say pregnant women being accused of bearing a child of a Chinese father having to undergo a forced abortion as well as forced prostitution for high officials. If that is not racism and misogyny, then any possible hope I had left for tankies will be lost.
inb4 it is all imperialist propaganda

Sabot Cat

29th December 2014, 03:58

As a proud Stalinist I am offended by that comment. As far as North Korea, I will be the first one to admit that there is most likely racist connotations in likening Obama to a monkey. At the same time, however, it should be noted that in many East Asian cultures a monkey is seen as a trickster and so North Korea might (but not certainly) be implying that Obama is behaving in a tricky and treacherous manner.

Nah, they meant it completely in a racist way.

http://kcna.co.jp/calendar/2014/05/05-02/2014-0502-020.html

http://freekorea.us/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/Screen-Shot-2014-05-10-at-7.32.05-PM.png
http://freekorea.us/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/Screen-Shot-2014-05-09-at-10.50.49-PM.png
http://freekorea.us/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/Screen-Shot-2014-05-09-at-10.50.06-PM.png

Ravn

29th December 2014, 06:41

Except the cultural connotations here are clearly negative when paired with adjectives like 'wicked' or being used in reference to enemies.

It's tautological that expressions with a derogatory intent are intentionally derogatory. The significance of any word usage is contextual. IOW, you can't claim that wicked *absolutely* always has a negative connotation. It's not the word itself but how it's used & what it means in a given context.

Korean ethnic nationalism is also clearly a thing, and a problem for the entire peninsular population, not just the DPRK; racially derogatory remarks like these are a manifestation of its prevalence there.

Racism is not good thing but you're using it as a red herring. Ethnic nationalism is not necessarily a good nor bad thing. It doesn't necessarily lead to xenophobia. You don't seem to recognize your own incipient cultural nationalism & the social chauvinism you bring to this. This whole thing was a reaction about a movie which depicted the assassination of the head of state of the DPRK, the accusation of the DPRK in internet hacking, & the subsequent attacks on their internet services. Don't you think people there have a legitimate gripe in being pissed off no matter how racist some of their remarks may be about it? You prefer to focus on racist remarks rather than put these remarks in a proper context. & face it. Neither North nor South Korea are at the top of the list as the enemies of African peoples. So, it seems that a lot of self-righteous grandstanding here is really projections.

Ravn

29th December 2014, 07:12

Fuck, I missed the golden opportunity to inflate my rep with low hanging fruit.

That's why rep is meaningless. The popularity of opinions is no guarantee of the validity or soundness of those opinions.

I am very curious what Ravn and the other North Korea apologists has to say pregnant women being accused of bearing a child of a Chinese father having to undergo a forced abortion as well as forced prostitution for high officials.

Nobody here, that's not joining in the self-righteous & misguided grandstanding, is an apologist for the DPRK regime. Are you determined to be an enemy of the North Korean people?

consuming negativity

29th December 2014, 07:14

It's tautological that expressions with a derogatory intent are intentionally derogatory. The significance of any word usage is contextual. IOW, you can't claim that wicked *absolutely* always has a negative connotation. It's not the word itself but how it's used & what it means in a given context.

Racism is not good thing but you're using it as a red herring. Ethnic nationalism is not necessarily a good nor bad thing. It doesn't necessarily lead to xenophobia. You don't seem to recognize your own incipient cultural nationalism & the social chauvinism you bring to this. This whole thing was a reaction about a movie which depicted the assassination of the head of state of the DPRK, the accusation of the DPRK in internet hacking, & the subsequent attacks on their internet services. Don't you think people there have a legitimate gripe in being pissed off no matter how racist some of their remarks may be about it? You prefer to focus on racist remarks rather than put these remarks in a proper context. & face it. Neither North nor South Korea are at the top of the list as the enemies of African peoples. So, it seems that a lot of self-righteous grandstanding here is really projections.

LOL

what is the proper context for these racist remarks? oh boo hoo, a fucking shithead actor like seth rogen made a D-grade movie, better insult the black people of the world and call obama a "wicked monkey" because they totally meant that positively in backwards stalinoid land where the tv watches you and obama self-identifies as a monkey

get the fuck outta here

Ravn

29th December 2014, 07:38

LOL

what is the proper context for these racist remarks? oh boo hoo, a fucking shithead actor like seth rogen made a D-grade movie, better insult the black people of the world

How is insulting Obama insulting black people? Obama's indifference to black people is insulting to black people. Seth Rogen is laughing all the way to the bank until the checks bounce and the neoliberals are licking their chops at North Korea & are fine that even wannabe leftists will jump on the wagon to support the imperialist bring down of the DPRK. The tail is wagging the dog.

and call obama a "wicked monkey" because they totally meant that positively in backwards stalinoid land where the tv watches you and obama self-identifies as a monkey
get the fuck outta here

I could care less what some people on the street in Korea said about Obama. & I'll bet good money that Obama is not losing any sleep over it nor any black people are. There is bigger fish to fry elsewhere.

Feel free to knock yourself out, though.

Ravn

29th December 2014, 07:49

consuming negativity

29th December 2014, 07:52

uhh, you don't see how racist remarks are insulting to more than just one person? or are you disputing that they are in fact racist, like you were earlier? or both?

why is it "insulting" to black people that obama is "indifferent" towards them? because he's supposed to have loyalty to "his" race? :rolleyes: you know, ignoring the fact that he also has european/white ancestry but is treated like "a black man" specifically because of his physical characteristics regardless of his actual background. which is the entire fucking problem, by the way. funny how nobody seemed to think it was "insulting" that [insert white man here] didn't give a fuck about black people, but suddenly obama is taking heat for the continuing status quo. and don't backtrack either - these are the underlying assumptions that contribute to the ridiculous racism apologism that you're shitting out all over this thread. let me ask you this - why does the north korean government refer to obama as a "wicked monkey" but the president of south korea as a "prostitute" - with both intended to be insulting? how can you actually sit here and deny this obvious racism and sexism? "oh, they meant it in a good way!" "it's only insulting if you think it is insulting!" you're not just an ignorant stalinoid kiddie, you're a racist and probably a stormfront troll for you to keep purposefully moving the goalposts the way you are. intellectual dishonesty, shitty racist opinions, defending north korea as communist? if someone ought to be knocked out, it's you

just sayin'

Sabot Cat

29th December 2014, 09:53

The significance of any word usage is contextual. IOW, you can't claim that wicked *absolutely* always has a negative connotation. It's not the word itself but how it's used & what it means in a given context.

:laugh:

Humoring you: At best, 'wicked' means 'very' in New England... so... the North Korean government has either called Obama a 'very black monkey' or an 'evil black monkey'.

Why are you still defending them again?

Ethnic nationalism is not necessarily a good nor bad thing. It doesn't necessarily lead to xenophobia.

Ah, you're right. As Marx once said, "Pride in one's own race - and that does not imply contempt for other races- is also a normal and healthy sentiment."

Oh wait, I'm sorry, that was Adolf Hitler. Whoops.

You don't seem to recognize your own incipient cultural nationalism & the social chauvinism you bring to this. This whole thing was a reaction about a movie which depicted the assassination of the head of state of the DPRK, the accusation of the DPRK in internet hacking, & the subsequent attacks on their internet services. Don't you think people there have a legitimate gripe in being pissed off no matter how racist some of their remarks may be about it? You prefer to focus on racist remarks rather than put these remarks in a proper context. & face it.

Actually, the first time they pulled this shit was over Obama visiting the Republic of Korea. So, no, fuck their racism and fuck you for defending it.

Sabot Cat

29th December 2014, 09:59

I could care less what some people on the street in Korea said about Obama.

Likely a fictitious personality, and even if it wasn't, this was published in their national news agency and distributed for an international audience without comment, retraction, or anything.

If say, the NHK presented a piece using this language, I really doubt I'd see you jump up to defend them.

& I'll bet good money that Obama is not losing any sleep over it nor any black people are. There is bigger fish to fry elsewhere.

Feel free to knock yourself out, though.

And the KCNA isn't losing sleeping over being racists, but here you are. Consequently, your appeals to bigger problems aren't really convincing.

Vladimir Innit Lenin

29th December 2014, 10:54

Nah, they meant it completely in a racist way.

http://kcna.co.jp/calendar/2014/05/05-02/2014-0502-020.html

http://freekorea.us/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/Screen-Shot-2014-05-10-at-7.32.05-PM.png
http://freekorea.us/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/Screen-Shot-2014-05-09-at-10.50.49-PM.png
http://freekorea.us/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/Screen-Shot-2014-05-09-at-10.50.06-PM.png

Whilst RAVN is clearly a troll who is too stupid and boring to waste more words on, I think the above is worth quoting and re-highlighting, just so we can see how ridiculous some of these North Korea apologist remarks now look in the face of actual evidence (not that I imagine they'll let that get in the way of their ideology, petty evidence!).

RedWorker

29th December 2014, 12:41

Ravn, get the fuck out of here.

Per Levy

29th December 2014, 14:06

i know we shouldnt post pictures and stuff but this is very much topical and so true:

https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-pqOzBshpSno/U3PjXO8EsHI/AAAAAAAAATw/CrKB3a45WNA/s1600/001.png

good ol gmil.

Ravn

29th December 2014, 16:42

why is it "insulting" to black people that obama is "indifferent" towards them? because he's supposed to have loyalty to "his" race?

It's got nothing to do with his ancestry. It's just a fact that he's indifferent to conditions of black people, particularly the black proletariat. (If you're really concerned about black people, why are you not concerned about that?!) It's not a matter of race loyalty. It's just ironic that you expect black people to be up in arms over an insult directed at such a duplicitous asshole. I don't hate this guy because he's whatever he is. I don't like what he does. Do you like that he sends drones all over the world & kills people? That's the guy you're rushing to defend here, remember? He's the current executive of the American empire & he acts accordingly.

Creative Destruction

29th December 2014, 16:52

pesca rojo

Redistribute the Rep

29th December 2014, 17:12

It's just ironic that you expect black people to be up in arms over an insult directed at such a duplicitous asshole.

Nobody expects people to "be up in arms," but I would expect any rational person to at least acknowledge this as racism, something you have not done.

I don't hate this guy because he's whatever he is. I don't like what he does.

Then why don't you focus your criticism on what he does, instead of defending and minimizing racist remarks about who he is?

Ravn

29th December 2014, 17:40

Nobody expects people to "be up in arms," but I would expect any rational person to at least acknowledge this as racism, something you have not done.

So it's racism. Why the irrational response about it? & before you tell me what I acknowledged or haven't acknowledged, actually read my posts. I think you're missing some nuances about them.

Sinister Cultural Marxist

29th December 2014, 19:18

It's got nothing to do with his ancestry. It's just a fact that he's indifferent to conditions of black people, particularly the black proletariat. (If you're really concerned about black people, why are you not concerned about that?!) It's not a matter of race loyalty. It's just ironic that you expect black people to be up in arms over an insult directed at such a duplicitous asshole. I don't hate this guy because he's whatever he is. I don't like what he does. Do you like that he sends drones all over the world & kills people? That's the guy you're rushing to defend here, remember? He's the current executive of the American empire & he acts accordingly.

And you're defending a racist and sexist government that is responsible for a bunch of atrocious actions itself, and which works to preserve a significant wealth and services gap within its own borders despite its "proletarian" pretensions.

Invader Zim

29th December 2014, 20:00

Whilst RAVN is clearly a troll who is too stupid and boring to waste more words on, I think the above is worth quoting and re-highlighting, just so we can see how ridiculous some of these North Korea apologist remarks now look in the face of actual evidence (not that I imagine they'll let that get in the way of their ideology, petty evidence!).

Has nobody informed you that facts and evidence are concerns of the petite-bourgeoisie?

Tim Redd

1st January 2015, 00:35

How is insulting Obama insulting black people? Obama's indifference to black people is insulting to black people. Seth Rogen is laughing all the way to the bank until the checks bounce and the neoliberals are licking their chops at North Korea & are fine that even wannabe leftists will jump on the wagon to support the imperialist bring down of the DPRK. The tail is wagging the dog.

I think that attacking Obama from a racist angle, even if he is the chief executive officer of imperialism, is in fact offensive to the universal understanding that racism is invalid.

Ravn

1st January 2015, 06:44

I think that attacking Obama from a racist angle, even if he is the chief executive officer of imperialism, is in fact offensive to the universal understanding that racism is invalid.

There is no universal understanding of racism. Somebody claimed here that statements made against Obama were an insult to black people. Did they take a poll? Who is really outraged by these comments? I don't see any mass outrage in the black community.There's a presumption operating here that black people should internalize these aesthetics & then be offended. So, people who don't like black people refer to black people as monkeys. Those people are justsignifying the monkey. (IOW, they're being foolish.)

In regards to here on this site, this has been an opportunity to make platitudes against racism, & chastising the North Korean people at the same time. (How ironic.)

Ravn

1st January 2015, 07:11

And you're defending a racist and sexist government that is responsible for a bunch of atrocious actions itself, and which works to preserve a significant wealth and services gap within its own borders despite its "proletarian" pretensions.

Whatever the DPRK has done or not, it's small potatoes in comparison to its imperialist enemies. If their imperialist enemies topple them or co-opt them, you can rest assured that whatever racism that exists there now will be upgraded wherein you don't openly call people names, you just go along with racist policies pretending otherwise.

The lack of proportionality here is ridiculous. You've taken a few comments from people on the street & turned them into a campaign against the North Korean people while you indulge in ultra-liberalism being led by the imperialists.

Atsumari

1st January 2015, 07:20

I will give this one more try, but calling someone a "crossbreed with unclear blood" sounds like the kind of shit I hear on /pol/ and scumfront. KNCA also in the past said "still has the figure of monkey while the human race has evolved through millions of years" and "it would be perfect for Obama to live with a group of monkeys in the world’s largest African natural zoo and lick the bread crumbs thrown by spectators."
Totally not racist. It is not like implying that blacks not evolved is something racists have not said and obviously not universal, especially when it comes to "science".

Source if you want it
http://freekorea.us/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/Screen-Shot-2014-05-09-at-10.50.49-PM.png

And we are not launching a campaign against the North Korean people, we are mostly criticizing the government, KNCA in particular, but even if we were criticizing the people, that is not a far-fetched thing to in any "democracy." So if Kim il Sung, Kim Jong il, and Kim Jong Un truly represents the will of the people in every action he does and does something questionable, then it is not irrational to criticize the North Korean people. Of course this is not the case though.

Ravn

1st January 2015, 08:10

I will give this one more try, but calling someone a "crossbreed with unclear blood" sounds like the kind of shit I hear on /pol/ and scumfront. KNCA also in the past said "still has the figure of monkey while the human race has evolved through millions of years" and "it would be perfect for Obama to live with a group of monkeys in the world’s largest African natural zoo and lick the bread crumbs thrown by spectators."
Totally not racist. It is not like implying that blacks not evolved is something racists have not said and obviously not universal, especially when it comes to "science".

Well, I "totally" didn't say it wasn't racist. You "totally" can't seem to bother to deal with what people actually say with whom you disagree with. But you're going to "totally" try to do this very same thing once again. That's just "totally" stupid. But OTOH, you seem to "totally" enjoy repeating this racist nonsense over & over again. You can even bother to actually quote it. Can't cite me, but you can't cite this shit over & over again. So, what exactly do you think you're proving here? What are you acting out?

You are amusing that's for sure.

1st January 2015, 09:05

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/sony-hack-north-korea-calls-4879778

North Korea has decided to call Barack Obama a 'monkey'. I'd love to see the tankie defence to this. Presumably some extreme reductio ad absurdium version of cultural relativism.

I have no affection for North Korea's government, but race is a location-specific concept, as are racial slurs. Some people who are regarded as "black" in the Untied States would be regarded as "white" in Brazil, for example. That comparisons to monkeys has a racial connotation in the United States doesn't imply that it does in Korea which shares none of the American experience of African slavery, apartheid and racism.

Or maybe they were trying to be racist - who knows? Not as racist as supporting the NYPD.

Still, this whole thing is just fucking boring. A tinpot quasi-monarchy with nukes going up against the arch-imperialists. Both are fucking assholes.

Really? Cause its your thread...making fun of the DPRK is a source of endless fascination for believers in American exceptionalism.

Mass Grave Aesthetics

1st January 2015, 13:18

I have no affection for North Korea's government, but race is a location-specific concept, as are racial slurs. Some people who are regarded as "black" in the Untied States would be regarded as "white" in Brazil, for example. That comparisons to monkeys has a racial connotation in the United States doesn't imply that it does in Korea which shares none of the American experience of African slavery, apartheid and racism.
All cultural relativism aside: If you read the letter Sabot Cat shared you'll see it claims Obama is born of "cross- breed blood, which is impure blood; Obama is born of a monkey". They go on to call him "an ugly sub- human" who "remains like a monkey even though the human race has evolved for millions of years".:o

Or maybe they were trying to be racist - who knows? Not as racist as supporting the NYPD.
Maybe not but the racism of the NYPD, vile and brutal as it is, does not make the DPRK any less racist IMHO.

Sharia Lawn

1st January 2015, 13:36

Remember Eldridge Cleaver's comment about North Koreans' "unsubtle racism" after he visited the country in the late 1960s? Is anybody really surprised that one of the Kims would say this?

Tim Redd

2nd January 2015, 04:16

I think that attacking Obama from a racist angle, even if he is the chief executive officer of imperialism, is in fact offensive to the universal understanding that racism is invalid.

There is no universal understanding of racism.

Really? For the most part what defines racism is universally known and accepted. I.e. known by those without a non-racist viewpoint

Somebody claimed here that statements made against Obama were an insult to black people. Did they take a poll?

Why would a poll need to be taken on what constitutes racism? It's not a matter of whether or not the remarks are determined to be racist by a poll.

Whether something should be opposed or supported is not mainly dependent on the opinions of those who are not progressive regardless of race.

Who is really outraged by these comments? I don't see any mass outrage in the black community. There's a presumption operating here that black people should internalize these aesthetics & then be offended.

Whether or not most Blacks are offended and or are protesting the issue of "monkey" nomenclature attacks regarding on Obama, with respect to scientifically making revolution, it's about what objectively constitutes racism and the fact that whatever is objectively racist should be opposed by the revolutionary masses, revolutionaries and the revolutionary party.

Tim Redd

2nd January 2015, 04:50

Remember Eldridge Cleaver's comment about North Koreans' "unsubtle racism" after he visited the country in the late 1960s? Is anybody really surprised that one of the Kims would say this?

No because if they ever had a revolutionary line certainly they had given it up somewhere in the 1960's. What is with the hereditary bull crap? Visiting their web site and reading their political line and policies clearly shows that they are not revolutionary communists.

Sasha

2nd January 2015, 11:10

But muh orientalism, not white people with red flags who piss off United $nake$ of Amerikkka are always right right?!?

Ravn

2nd January 2015, 18:42

For the most part what defines racism is universally known and accepted. I.e. known by those without a non-racist viewpoint

What's universally known is not necessarily what is universally understood. Non-partisan views are impossible. People can claim to have a non-racist viewpoint & yet have racist ideas in their viewpoint nonetheless.

Why would a poll need to be taken on what constitutes racism?

The poll would be about whether people are insulted about particular remarks, not a poll about whether the remarks are racist.

It's matter of whether or the remarks are objectively racist as decided by the majority of progressives and revolutionaries of all races.

Nobody can decide what the objective truth is. The argument here is on what to do about it.

Whether something should be opposed or supported is not mainly dependent on the opinions of those who are not progressive regardless of race.

Progressive thought is reformist so what it opposes or supports is based on opportunism.

Whether or not most Blacks are offended and or are protesting the issue of "monkey" nomenclature attacks regarding on Obama, with respect to scientifically making revolution, it's about what objectively constitutes racism and the fact that whatever is objectively racist should be opposed by the revolutionary masses, revolutionaries and the revolutionary party.

That opposition has to be logical, proportional & sound. The response here isn't particularly neither any of these.

RevUK

3rd January 2015, 17:44

Weak communists worldwide will disown a socialist government like North Korea as soon as it falls into difficulty due to imperialist aggression.

Fuel sanctions mean that the Koreans can't use modern farming equipment and suffer famines. Rationing and limiting the influx of propaganda by controlling the media are essential to maintaining stability and provisions in the country. But because Korea isn't a Marxist paradise, it gets disowned and slandered by dogmatic utopians.

Focussing on the fact that they called Barack Obama a name is petty, playground divisiveness. It shows a lack of solidarity and an emptiness of character that more people don't stand with the Koreans.

Tim Redd

3rd January 2015, 23:37

Nobody can decide what the objective truth is. The argument here is on what to do about it.

Sure people can decide what objective truth is. They do so based upon analysis of relevant, objective facts and experience.

Tim Redd

3rd January 2015, 23:44

Progressive thought is reformist so what it opposes or supports is based on opportunism.

By progressive I mean elements who are part of a united front on one or more issues with the communist party. In some united fronts progressives will unite with the communist goals of a communist party. In other united fronts, elements may take part in a united front of struggle with the communist party, though they do not unite with communist goal of the communist party.

That opposition has to be logical, proportional & sound. The response here isn't particularly neither any of these.

Says you.

Tim Redd

4th January 2015, 01:04

The Intransigent Faction

5th January 2015, 00:31

Meanwhile, the U.S. is placing new sanctions on North Korea under dubious pretenses relating to the Sony hack. If this even accomplishes a damn thing, it will just be increasing the mutual antagonism between these states (and between North and South Korea) as a pretext for still further increasing that antagonism. All that will really mean is the worsening of the lives of North Koreans and more despotic measures all around.

Ravn

5th January 2015, 06:08

Sure people can decide what objective truth is. They do so based upon analysis of relevant, objective facts and experience.

You have to ascertain --to find out definitely-- what objective reality is. Not arbitrarily decide what it is.

Ravn

5th January 2015, 06:19

Originally Posted by Tim Redd http://www.revleft.com/vb/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.revleft.com/vb/showthread.php?p=2812525#post2812525)
For the most part what defines racism is universally known and accepted. I.e. known by those without a non-racist viewpoint

Racism is universally known but not necessarily universally understood nor is there an agreement about racism that is universal. Instead of relying on an appeal to popular opinion, put understanding & knowledge on objective basis.

What I meant by "define" is to do so accurately. If you can define racism accurately, you therefore also understand it.

A well-defined definition will enable you to reiterate a definition accurately. But what does this definition necessarily have to do with objective reality?

Not sure where you got "non-partisan" or what that means in this context.

That there is no universal view of anything. All views are a reflection of a partisan viewpoint.

Ravn

5th January 2015, 06:25

By progressive I mean elements who are part of a united front on one or more issues ... [i]n some united fronts progressives will unite with the communist goals ... In other united fronts, elements may take part in a united front ... though they do not unite with communist goal...

That's all a reflection of their opportunism.

RevUK

6th January 2015, 16:28

Tim Redd

7th January 2015, 00:30

Weak communists worldwide will disown a socialist government like North Korea as soon as it falls into difficulty due to imperialist aggression.

I held the North Korean party and regime as suspect when I found that they did not take up or commence the kind of cultural revolution that was being undertaken in the China from the mid 60's to the mid 70's.

The failure of the North Korean regime to uphold the Maoist line when the Chinese capitalists restored power led by Deng Xiaoping after Mao died confirmed to me that they were not revolutionary communists. And my opinion continues to this day. If you read the goals of their struggle on the party's website it doesn't even mention the abolition of classes and all exploitation and oppression as aims of the party or state.

The Intransigent Faction

7th January 2015, 01:08

Those "despotic measures" are necessary to maintain the government.

Oh, I never contested that (except that I'm not sure what you mean by "the government"...multiple states are suppressing the international working class), I just said they would be intensified. They're "necessary" from the ruling class's perspective, though.

RedWorker

7th January 2015, 01:35

Those "despotic measures" are necessary to maintain the government, i.e. the only thing that is keeping many Koreans alive via rations and other social welfare provisions.

Get the hell out, this Web site isn't for you. It may very well be that North Korea are the real communists and we're not; in that case we're not real communists, so why are you interacting with us?

RevUK

7th January 2015, 03:36

Get the hell out, this Web site isn't for you. It may very well be that North Korea are the real communists and we're not; in that case we're not real communists, so why are you interacting with us?

I believe in a big tent. I'll leave the usual communist infighting, divisiveness and friendly-fire to you.

The Intransigent Faction

7th January 2015, 03:49

I believe in a big tent. I'll leave the usual communist infighting, divisiveness and friendly-fire to you.

Condemnation of dynastic rule under any pretext is not "communist infighting". Even most "anti-Imperialists" aside from Harpal Brar and his group don't claim it's a genuinely socialist society (and they consider modern China socialist as well).

That's not to say I don't believe in reaching out to supporters who confuse North Korea for a place where workers own the means of production and hence support it.

RevUK

7th January 2015, 04:01

Condemnation of dynastic rule under any pretext is not "communist infighting".

By all means, people can debate the validity of Korean socialism but condemning them for the way they choose their leaders is absurd. Either it is socialism or it is not. Who is related to who is irrelevant.

The Intransigent Faction

7th January 2015, 04:24

Tim Redd

7th January 2015, 04:29

By all means, people can debate the validity of Korean socialism but condemning them for the way they choose their leaders is absurd. Either it is socialism or it is not. Who is related to who is irrelevant.

How in any way is it legitimate to choose the leader in a genuine (Maoist) communist party on the basis of heredity? Even the most progressive bourgeois ideology disdains the selection of leaders on the basis heredity (aka nepotism).

Does any true revolutionary think that its legitimate to chose leaders based upon nepotism rather than from a majority vote after performing an objective analysis of the qualities of candidates and an analysis of the leadership qualities that best suit the current conditions.