communism in north korea!

[damn the capitalism]

i just need to know ,at what point the communist regime is applied in north korea!so can we consider it as communist country till our presents days?

[hazard]

what?

yes...I think

[Nick Yves]

I don't consider North Korea a communist country. It has a closed economy, yes, but thats about it...its still very oppressive.

[ComradeJunichi]

I'm sure Chairman Mao can answer these questions on the DPRK much better than I can...

I believe the DPRK is socialist, following the ideas of Juche. It hasn't collapsed, even though we've heard that the DPRK is doing horrible and is going to collapse any second...since like, what twenty years ago? I know I have because I've lived in the US and the ROK.


Quote: from jetgrind on 2:39 am on May 6, 2003
I don't consider North Korea a communist country. It has a closed economy, yes, but thats about it...its still very oppressive.

How do you know it's "very oppressive"?

[Nick Yves]

From what I have been told and what I have read. Yes, it may be American propaganda, but I would still rather live here than over their, unless they were truly communist.

[Saint-Just]

I am not going to give this a particularly long answer. Everthing I will say I have said numerous times before, I have received this question so many times, or ones similar.

The DPRK has a planned economy; as Kim Il Sung asserted this is one of the first measures as to whether or not a society is socialist. The country has used collective labour to create many constructions, from the towering apartment blocks that provide people housing at the point of necessity, to schools, transport, places of entertainment and so forth.

The country, in Juche, reitarated Marxist-Leninist theory whilst expounding the philosophical aspects of it. Pointing out that socialism is integral in realising the independance and creativity in the working class, enabling them to build a utopian society. It realised that one of the keys to communism was creating a homogenous society in respect to ideology.

In the DPRK everything is orientated ideologically, as Kim Jong Il, everything must be subordinated to its idelogical content. Mass demonstrations, mass celebrations, mass labour tasks. People's lives are organised around building a socialist society.

As of present there are great difficulties and rather than building socialism they are concentrating everything, even their lives on defending it.

[damn the capitalism]

thanx chairmanmao, i usualy respect your opinions and your views,
so if u can give more details so i can learn, i will appreciate this so much!
another thing that i wanted to know is that: do the peoples in north korea are happy and have faith and live in happiness and comfort with the communism regime, or there other things to say!
another thing,Does communism there have led the society to a classless one? is there an equality there?

[Saint-Just]

Quote: from damn the capitalism on 9:28 pm on May 6, 2003
thanx chairmanmao, i usualy respect your opinions and your views,
so if u can give more details so i can learn, i will appreciate this so much!
another thing that i wanted to know is that: do the peoples in north korea are happy and have faith and live in happiness and comfort with the communism regime, or there other things to say!
another thing,Does communism there have led the society to a classless one? is there an equality there?

I greatly respect your views too, you are obviously a brave and fierce patriot of your country. I have a collection of answers to some questions on the DPRK, that I often now refer people to because I have talked about this subject so many times. I am a member of an organisation linked to the DPRK and other similar groups around the world that study and share solidarity towards the country trying to spread the Marxist-Leninist society in Korea as an idea around the world.

First I will address your classless society question. I have address it in the information I will give you. In addition to that though: there is certainly no classless society in the DPRK at present. They have been building one for 50 years. They have removed some of the class boundaries, have been able to supply everyone with housing and food, although not for the last 10 years. They have at the moment a class system, those who live in the city and those who live in rural areas, also party officials are better off. Generally all in the city enjoy good standards of living, education for all and so forth. They are creating a homogenous mass of working class, and great steps have been taken in this area, for example, religion has almost been totally diminished. I will explain why in the last 10 years the class struggle has slowed later. If you want to see pictures of the DPRK, just ask me, they propound how beautiful a socialist society the DPRK is. Here is the collection of previous replies to questions I have given:

The DPRK as I will not explain cannot create a socialist paradise in the present circumstances, far from it they struggle to maintain development and the very existence of the nation. All of their policies are orientated to maintain the socialist system of the country and protect the Korean people. If this was not the case the country would no longer be DPRK. Most western liberal democracies can enjoy the luxury of not being under this threat. The WPK tries to maintain a good standard of living for its people, and in many instances does. However it has to make sacrifices to uphold the socialist society so in the long-term they may be free of imperialist and capitalist interventions and develop socialism further.

To your image of the DPRK economic situation; the DPRK is under masses of pressure, economic and political, trying to force it to cave in, this has been the case for over 50 years. At times the pressure increases, as it did in the 60’s and now has again since 1993. Any capitalist country would have been obliterated under this pressure and collapsed irretrievably to imperialist poisoning. The DPRK has created a society that’s absolute focus is to maintain its independence and thus its socialist system. It has done this through creating an indomitable sense of single hearted unity between workers, leader and party. In addition its army-orientated society and army-centred politics have created a nation as powerful to hold off U.S. imperialists aggression.

TWEA (trade with enemies agreement). A program that hinders any country trading with the DPRK without special permission, and also stops any ships leaving with goods for export from the DPRK. In effect the DPRK cannot export anything, and so countries will supply them with any resources if there is nothing in return. In the last 10 years it has become far harder, since the U.S. stepped up blocades and the Koreans amongst the obvious problems with production could not gain the materials to construct dams and necessary countermeasures to the freak weather conditions that gripped the country since 1994 and still continue to. The DPRK's power output is at 10% of what it was in the 1970's due to sanctions (TWEA - Trade with Enemy Acts). The U.S. claims this is not due to the fact they they can't import any fossil fuels except as direct aid from the U.S., they claim that economic mismanagement is intrinsic in socialism – that’s erroneous ideological rhetoric of the Bush cohort.

You suggest that Kim Jong Il has taken the wrong policy for the Korean people. Economically I have explained his policy but also, recently his mastery of foreign policy has kept the U.S. at bay. In 1993 when the U.S. threatened to attack the DPRK he closed down nuclear plants as the U.S. demanded. He then agreed a deal in which the U.S. would provide light water reactors and oil as they were being built so the DPRK could produce energy after the U.S. forced the closure of its nuclear plants. Then after the DPRK-U.S. agreed framework which was signed 8 years ago broke down as the U.S. said that a DPRK diplomat had admitted to DPRK nuclear development. The U.S. had never kept to their side of the deal anyway:

“Often forgotten in accounts of North Korean duplicity is that the Americans have not kept most of these promises.” –Martin Woolacott The Guardian Newspaper.

The U.S. would no longer allow them to acquire oil or any other means of creating enery – this was in a hope to break the regime down economically. To counter this, since the DPRK was now out of the Agreed Framework due to the U.S. having pulled out, it withdrawed from the NPT, and legally restarted its reactors to once again create energy. Then the U.S. said it would have to take affirmative action unless the DPRK stop its nuclear programme that the U.S. could not even substantiate actually existed. The U.S. has torn up the agreements it has with the DPRK so that the DPRK could once again become self-sufficient in energy production, although it still struggles due to blocades. The DPRK, under the army-orientated policy of the 90's onwards had created a force strong enough to keep the U.S. warmongers at bay. Subsequently the U.S. hopes to weaken the DPRK economically so that it can then launch a military campaign to destroy socialism in Korea. As this happens the DPRK is remaining economically stable after years of decline due to blocade and retains an army strong enough to make the U.S. think twice. The DPRK however, really does need nuclear weapons when there are around 1,700 U.S. nuclear warheads in South Korea.

The DPRK has repeatedly offered to sign a no-strike agreement with the U.S. that would agree that neither side would strike first. However, the U.S. has rejected this saying that would be to reward the DPRK for its bad behaviour.


2. In no country does a leader not enjoy things such as cars and luxury housing and so forth. Why does this matter. What matters is the attitude of the leader towards the people and what policies are constructed and how they are carried out amongst the people. Kim Jong Il may live in a nice house with a nice car, however he still goes to visit many working facilities and inspects the very minutia of working life. His greatest interest is that of the entire nation and its people.

Furthermore, you seem to suppose that there is a ruling clique divorced from the masses, specifically that the leader of the revolutionary masses - Kim Jong Il - is divorced from the masses. The theory of the "Revolutionary Outlook on the Leader," says that though the masses are the masters of history and revolution, they must organise themselves in the most effective way to bring about the revolution and socialist construction, this is done by creating a party with a leader and necessary command structure to organise the movement . This is given substance by the theory of the "Immortal Socio-Political Body," which says that the Leader, the Party and the masses form one socio-political body which is immortal, and the center, or brain, of this immortal body is the Leader.

To elucidate:
'the party as a political leadership body is inconceivable; separated from the masses, the party cannot lead the revolution and construction to victory.'

'The Juche idea allows to create an indescribable unity between the people’s masses and the leader, so in this way an independent and sovereign state can be built and the people can use their talent and power for their economic benefit.'

Indeed, Juche was developed with the view that the revolution could not be completed if the leader was divorced from the masses:
'However, the communists and nationalists who were allegedly engaged in the national-liberation movement in our country in the 1920's gave no thought to the need to go among the masses to educate, organize, and arouse them into waging a revolutionary struggle. But divorced from the masses they were only engrossed in the scramble for hegemony and empty talks. They did not unite the masses but divided them by factional stride.
In the first years of his revolutionary struggle, the leader saw through their mistakes and took a road different from theirs, the genuinely revolutionary road which led him to be among the masses and to rely on them in the struggle. He elucidated the truth that the masters of the revolution, are the masses of the people and that when one goes among them to educate and mobilize them one will be able to register in the revolution.’

'Our party exists for the people and regards it as its duty to fight to meet the people's desire for independence and their interests. Taking loving care of the people, serving them and forming a harmonious whole with them -- these are the intrinsic nature and basic characteristics of the party of Comrade Kim Il Sung.'

There is a great respect and love for Kim Jong Il in Korea. This is because of the unity that is necessary in socialist society. Kim Jong Il loves the people as they love him. They have unity in the links between party, leader and people. This unity is an integral part of the socialist system and a homogenous society. The compromise of this unity is the compromising of socialism, revolution and the nation.

3. The reactivation of the nuclear program is reactivation of a program concerned with energy production and is a program the U.S. forced the country in 1994 to shut down. In the long-term energy production can rebuild the economy as to let all people enjoy good standards of living. Currently there is a lack of raw materials for energy production. Nuclear production is the only opportunity they currently have for energy production besides the many hydro-electric plants they have. Fossil fuel energy production is extremely difficult since there is lack of access to fossil fuels because of the U.S. restrictions and its attempts to destroy the economy in the DPRK.

The DPRK has resolutely and successfully defended socialism however at great cost. Yet as of the arduous march of the 90’s and the forced march which aimed to keep the economy alive by increasing production they have kept socialism alive.


Pros of DPRK:

- They have continually waged class struggle and the fight against revisionism for over 50 years.

-They have created a socialist system of society that is moving evermore towards socialism. Class struggle still exists and indeed is quite intense, particularly under imperialist influence. However society is moving towards becoming a homogenous mass of working people with a single ideology and interest and great sense of unity, independence and urge to release all their creative efforts to further build a powerful socialist nation.

-The DPRK people have thwarted imperialist manouvres constantly for over 50 years as they have tried to bring socialism to its knees.

-The DPRK lets its’ people enjoy and independent life enriched by material acquisition and productive labour and un-antagonistic social relations.

-The DPRK workers have constructed massively, building many great edifices of people and socialism around Korea giving its people many wonderful public buildings, housings and work places.

-The DPRK people have created the Korean People’s Army that makes reactionaries forces feel under threat from socialist force for ever its existence.

-The DPRK have created a country that has great pride in what it can do and respect for other nations and progressive people around the world to build socialism further across the globe.

Also, 3 million people of the 22 million population are party members, with their occupations broken down as such:
-57% Labourers (skilled workers in the fisheries and in the heavy, mining, and defense industries)
-25.3% Farmers (cooperative)
-16.8% Officials
-0.9% Industrial cooperative workers

[damn the capitalism]

okay comrade maochairman, i'm really thanxfull,that's great!
i think u were getting bored when u were writing all this, soooo thanx a lot!

[abstractmentality]

Chairman Mao:
reading through this last post of yours, i was wondering how exactly the government works in north korea. i think i remember you once talking about the form of democracy within the DPRK, but im not sure if im remembering correctly.

i was also curious as to why, if the DPRK is going through economic difficulties as you point to, as well as i have pointed to in the past, are "party officials better off?" Personally, if i am in a country in which we are trying to build socialism, i dont want to see a party official have a "luxur" style of living while people are starving (as i have shown in previous articles.)

also, another question concerning the idea of Juche. everytime i read your writing on it, it seems as though it's a [i]forced unity of the people. maybe im getting the wrong idea about it, and you can clear that up if you would like to. if it is indeed a forced unity, then i must ask if this is true unity, or simply forced unity out of being scared of the Korean People's Army that is so strong, as you suggest and as the world knows?

[Saint-Just]

Quote: from abstractmentality on 11:43 pm on May 7, 2003
Chairman Mao:
reading through this last post of yours, i was wondering how exactly the government works in north korea. i think i remember you once talking about the form of democracy within the DPRK, but im not sure if im remembering correctly.

i was also curious as to why, if the DPRK is going through economic difficulties as you point to, as well as i have pointed to in the past, are "party officials better off?" Personally, if i am in a country in which we are trying to build socialism, i dont want to see a party official have a "luxur" style of living while people are starving (as i have shown in previous articles.)

also, another question concerning the idea of Juche. everytime i read your writing on it, it seems as though it's a [i]forced unity of the people. maybe im getting the wrong idea about it, and you can clear that up if you would like to. if it is indeed a forced unity, then i must ask if this is true unity, or simply forced unity out of being scared of the Korean People's Army that is so strong, as you suggest and as the world knows?

I did talk a little about how the government works. This is a simple explanation of the political system, ask if you want to know anything about the constitution and such:

The countries national assembly is now as the Supreme People's Assembly. It has between 600-700 delegates each representing and elected by 30,000 of the population. This assembly is the state legislature, like the house of representatives in U.S. and parliament in U.K. The Executive is called the central committee, this is elects a leader of the KWP (Korean Workers' Party), this leader, currently Kim Il Jong is like the president of U.S. or like Prime Minister of the U.K. The Party leader elects a politburo, this politburo is elected from members of the central committee, similarly to the way Tony Blair or George Bush choose ministers to be in his inner-circle.

The Supreme People's Assembly as in U.S. and U.K. system can remove members of the central committee and thus the KWP leadership. SPA elections occur every 4 years. Usually with many new members joining the SPA every election. The SPA is basically the most powerful body since it can depose the central committee. There is a beaurocratic arm of the state that is separated from the KWP, this works on the basis of local councils. In addition there are many other bodies, such as party secretariat that enacts politburo policies once they have passed through the legislature.

'if the DPRK is going through economic difficulties as you point to, as well as i have pointed to in the past, are "party officials better off'

Party officials are now better off because the tense economic situation had put compromise to order and retaining the socialist system in the country. The standards of living of officials is seen as a priority to maintain currently. Party officials do not have luxurious standards of living, apart from those on the central committee and other top state officials. But the standars of living of party officials is maintained at a reasonable level.

'it seems as though it's a forced unity of the people'

Thats a difficult question, as difficult as saying is socialism in the country forced. It was a popular movement that created the DPRK, a popular movement that created the party and elected the leader. Also, many people take participation in the running of the state. Koreans are not at all fearful of the KPA, it is a force they created to protect themselves. The KPA poses no threat to Korea. I do not know how many dissidents there are in Korea, nor can I say if unity is even forced on one person, I would certainly have to live in Korea to know this.

I'll make a few additions to my description of the political system in the DPRK. The CC (Central Committee) appoints the General Secretary (Leader of the KWP, currently Kim Jong Il). The CC selects the politburo, not the leader, to ammend what I previously said. The General Secretary most likely selects what is classicly known in all countries as an 'inner circle' from his CC, in the Politburo of the DPRK this is called the politburo presidium.

The differences between most Liberal Democracies are:
There is only one party in the DPRK.
The SPA selects the CC, in western systems the CC is normally selected by the party leader.
The CC selects the Politburo, in western systems the party leader usually organises the executive.
In western systems it can vary, but often party leader is elected by representatives, in DPRK the CC selects the leader.

(Edited by Chairman Mao at 6:59 pm on May 8, 2003)

[abstractmentality]

basically what you described to me is a semi-parliamentary democracy. i am curious as to the precentage of incumbents within the Supreme Peoples Assembly that stay in power. democracy within the United states is horrible about this, with incumbency rates around, if not above 90%, due to several things, particularly incumbency effect and lack of competition. These two manifestations of failure in democracy is something that is critiqued highly in the United States, in fact im taking a course at my university in it right now.

now, when you say that their is only one party, how does that work? do different people within the same party run against eachother? if so, then how do their politics or ideas differ? how much of a choice do these people actually have? a common critique in american "democracy" is the lack of difference between the two major parties. here, it seems that their isnt much difference at all, and that their is only one party to choose from rather than two. also, are elections often left uncontested?

with all of these thoughts on democracy, is it the people leading the country, or the leadership leading the people? this is very important.

also, how does the judicial system work? how do judges become judges?

Party officials are now better off because the tense economic situation had put compromise to order and retaining the socialist system in the country. The standards of living of officials is seen as a priority to maintain currently. Party officials do not have luxurious standards of living, apart from those on the central committee and other top state officials. But the standars of living of party officials is maintained at a reasonable level.

this statement makes it seem as though the party officials are more important than the people. perhaps you should clear that up.

[Saint-Just]

Quote: from abstractmentality on 7:44 pm on May 8, 2003
basically what you described to me is a semi-parliamentary democracy. i am curious as to the precentage of incumbents within the Supreme Peoples Assembly that stay in power. democracy within the United states is horrible about this, with incumbency rates around, if not above 90%, due to several things, particularly incumbency effect and lack of competition. These two manifestations of failure in democracy is something that is critiqued highly in the United States, in fact im taking a course at my university in it right now.

now, when you say that their is only one party, how does that work? do different people within the same party run against eachother? if so, then how do their politics or ideas differ? how much of a choice do these people actually have? a common critique in american "democracy" is the lack of difference between the two major parties. here, it seems that their isnt much difference at all, and that their is only one party to choose from rather than two. also, are elections often left uncontested?

with all of these thoughts on democracy, is it the people leading the country, or the leadership leading the people? this is very important.

also, how does the judicial system work? how do judges become judges?

Party officials are now better off because the tense economic situation had put compromise to order and retaining the socialist system in the country. The standards of living of officials is seen as a priority to maintain currently. Party officials do not have luxurious standards of living, apart from those on the central committee and other top state officials. But the standars of living of party officials is maintained at a reasonable level.

this statement makes it seem as though the party officials are more important than the people. perhaps you should clear that up.

Each election, about 60% of parliament changes, thats if I remember correctly. This is because they rather like new and young representatives to take the place of older ones, I have no idea why this is. Something like 20% of the assembly is female, they want it higher though.

People vote for representatives who are members of the same party of course. I can only presume that the candidates don't have much difference in their policies or politics. They vote based on the competence of the candidates.

I too study politics, British and American, and of course Korean in my own time. I'm fully aware of the criticisms of U.S. democracy. However, these are bourgeois criticisms, the concepts for democracy are rather different in a one-party socialist state, although there are still some concepts that are relevant for both so your criticisms are valid.

On what level do you refer to uncontested? the power of the KWP is never contested, seats are always contested.

The Judiciary: Various courts exist, at the different levels of society.A t the lowest level are the people's courts, established in ordinary cities, counties, and urban districts. Special courts exist for the armed forces and for workers. The military courts have jurisdiction over all crimes committed by members of the armed forces or organs of the Ministry of Public Security. The workers courts have jurisdiction over criminal cases involvingvarious workers' bodies. In addition, the Korean Maritime Arbitration Committee judges on naval military affairs.

Judges are elected by the organs of state power at their corresponding levels, those of the Central Court by the SPA's Standing Committee, and those of the lower courts by the provincial and county people's assemblies. In addition to administering justice based on criminal and civil codes, the courts are in charge of political matters through serving re-education. I do not know however, I suspect that re-education comes through forced labour, possibly some learning as well. The issue of punishment is not expressly stated in the constitution or the criminal code; they rather re-education.

The collective interests of the workers, peasants, soldiers, and working intellectuals are protected by a parallel hierarchy of organs controlled at the top by the Central Procurator's Office. This office acts as the state's prosecutor and checks on the activities of all public organs and citizens to ensure their compliance with the laws and their "active struggle against all lawbreakers." Its authority extends to the courts, the decisions of which are subject to scrutiny. A judgment of the Central Court may be appealed to a session of the Central Court, of which the state's chief prosecutor is a statutory member.

The chief prosecutor, known as the procurator general, is appointed by and accountable to the SPA.

Basically, judges are elected by the assemblies that are parallel to the level of court they are working at.


To answer your last point, the people are most important. But the most important factor currently to uphold their independance and the socialist system of society is to maintain order, which is of particular problem because of the economic difficulties. I won't explain the economic difficulties as you've probably seen my detailing of it numerous times in previous posts. They maintain the officials good living standards, food, clothes and so on so that there will not be a slackening in order in society. As I say, this is only of recent due to the economic difficulties.

[abstractmentality]

Chairman Mao:
first, the reason i asked about the judicial system was because i was reading, and i saw that their isnt judicial review in north korea. is their a reason behind this, or is this simply a "check and balance" that was not seen as needed?

pertaining to the idea that the things i spoke of are "bourgeois criticisms" of the democracy in the DPRK, and that only some of the things i mentioned are legititmate, i would say that that connects completely to the "forcing" that i mentioned previously.

it is my belief that communist ideas cannot be forced upon a people, but rather something that is a mass movement. now, for hypothetical purposes, lets say that their was a mass movement for communism in North Korea when it got independence from Japan, then that would be a good thing. now, if the next generations dont want communism (or socialism), then they cannot be forced into it. this idea can not be forced onto people and expected to work for long periods of time (long is of course relative.) now, if these people are given, basically, one choice as to how their government is being run, then they arent really picking their government. just as if i were to vote in 2004 in the US, i really dont have much of a choice, the rep. and dem. basically being the same, and third parties having no chance of winning. so, basically we are forced to vote in the same centrist government. this also holds true there, or so it seems. they are forced to "vote" in the same government, and their vote doesnt really even matter. really, its nothing more than a pseudo democracy.

to quote a book im re-reading right now:
"The special legitimacy and moral authority of representative government is thought to result from its being an expression of the will of the people whom it rules. Representative democracy is said not simply to be government for the people but also government (indirectly) by the people.... Now, a parliament whose deputies vote without specific mandate from their constituents is no more the expression of their will than is a dictatorship which rules with kindly intent but independently of its subjects.... So long as i do not, either in person or through my agent, join in the enactment of the laws by which i cam governed, i cannot justly claim to be autonomous."
and that is what i see in the DPRK. this is not something to praise, but rather to be very critical of, just as i am of the "democracy" we have in the US.

ill write some more in a bit, im hungry...


(Edited by abstractmentality at 1:01 pm on May 9, 2003)

[Saint-Just]

Quote: from abstractmentality on 6:39 am on May 9, 2003
Chairman Mao:
first, the reason i asked about the judicial system was because i was reading, and i saw that their isnt judicial review in north korea. is their a reason behind this, or is this simply a "check and balance" that was not seen as needed?

pertaining to the idea that the things i spoke of are "bourgeois criticisms" of the democracy in the DPRK, and that only some of the things i mentioned are legititmate, i would say that that connects completely to the "forcing" that i mentioned previously.

it is my belief that communist ideas cannot be forced upon a people, but rather something that is a mass movement. now, for hypothetical purposes, lets say that their was a mass movement for communism in North Korea when it got independence from Japan, then that would be a good thing. now, if the next generations dont want communism (or socialism), then they cannot be forced into it. this idea can not be forced onto people and expected to work for long periods of time (long is of course relative.) now, if these people are given, basically, one choice as to how their government is being run, then they arent really picking their government. just as if i were to vote in 2004 in the US, i really dont have much of a choice, the rep. and dem. basically being the same, and third parties having no chance of winning. so, basically we are forced to vote in the same centrist government. this also holds true there, or so it seems. they are forced to "vote" in the same government, and their vote doesnt really even matter. really, its nothing more than a pseudo democracy.

to quote a book im re-reading right now:
"The special legitimacy and moral authority of representative government is thought to result from its being an expression of the will of the people whom it rules. Representative democracy is said not simply to be government for the people but also government (indirectly) by the people.... Now, a parliament whose deputies vote without specific mandate from their constituents is no more the expression of their will that is a dictatorship which rules with kindly intent but independently of its subjects.... So long as i do not, either in person or through my agent, join in the enactment of the laws by which i cam governed, i cannot justly claim to be autonomous."
and that is what i see in the DPRK. this is not something to praise, but rather to be very critical of, just as i am of the "democracy" we have in the US.

ill write some more in a bit, im hungry...

Anything owned by the bourgeois class, even in part, is always bourgeois in nature, the bourgeois nature negates the wants and needs of the masses. The communist movement does not desire universal free speech, it desires free speech for one class. To do this it must become a dictatorship, the mass class must create a dictatorship, so - the policies of the masses, the free unequivocal speech of the masses and the creativity of the masses - is espoused to liberate the working class and repress the former ruling class.

Democracy can only come through a new class dictatorship. We do not need nor do we desire democracy of the bourgeois. As the working class become a dictatorship of their own construction they become a system solely operated for the liberation and progression of the working class. It is a dictatorship to one class; the bourgeoisie, but a democracy for the owners of this dictatorship; the working class.

‘In capitalist society, where society is split into classes and people’s interests conflict, one ideology cannot hold undivided sway and it is inevitable that different ideas exist. The imperialists and their mouthpieces claim the existence of these ideas is a source of pride for the “free world”. However, progressive ideas can never develop freely in a capitalist society, where the means of propaganda such a education and the mass media are in the hands of the monopoly capitalists and reactionary rulers.’ Kim Jong Il

‘The reactionary bourgeois ruling class tolerates progressive ideas to some extent, to make capitalist society seem democratic; but when they are considered the slightest threat to its ruling system, it mercilessly oppresses them.’ Kim Jong Il

I think you too asserted that in western system it is a false democracy. I agree that the votes in the DPRK have nothing to do with checks and balances towards the government. The election of representatives is in operation to put forward the best candidates for governance.

The greatest quality for democracy of any system is that it operates in the interest of the working class. This is done in the DPRK by the inseperable unity between leader, party and people. The party is built from the working class. It is possible that a leader could betray the masses, however, society is politicised as to an extent that it is no longer the leader as in bourgeois society that constructs society, but that as is the saying of Juche; ‘the masses are the owners of the revolution and construction’. The leader guides an ideological path, but the fate of the country is with the masses. From their work to their governing, they cannot oppose WPK power or the power of the leader, this is because the WPK is their party, the leader is the working classes leader. They created the revolution; if you observe DPRK society it is quite obvious that they support the WPK. I would suggest that in the entire world the DPRK has the greatest support for its government and system of society. For 50 years the masses have heard the socialist view of history and the ideological standpoint of Juche. The DPRK has been constructing a homogenous working class, one with a single viewpoint and a single class interest. Democracy is inherent in socialism, if the country deviates from socialism it will deviate from democracy. Kim Il Sung did create a measure of socialism in society, and such works are widely taught among the people.

I do believe that communism can be forced on people, but it requires a mass movement for communism to gain power, and communism is nothing unless it is a mass movement. But it can be forced on a minority of society.


As to your quote; the dictatorship in the DPRK does not rule independently of the people, it is a dictatorship of a class. Party cadres do work intently among the masses, and this is where they gain or maintain their class thought.


I am unawares as to whether they have judicial review…


I think you have to be a Marxist-Leninist to agree with the DPRK system.

[abstractmentality]

hmm...sorry about not coming back after dinner to write more, i got caught up in some stuff...

since i didnt really explain the quote i wrote in my last post, i will do so shortly here. my main point was that if the government is not by the people, then it means nothing. 3 million members of the party relative to a 22 million population isnt saying much. it is saying, though, that the party is a small minority. and in that, the state means nothing as it is not by the people.

ok, i do agree with you that certain ideas we have in todays society are bourgeois in nature. that is not debatable, as it is fact.

particularly concerning democracy and the state, what is your vision of how is should be run? should the people be able to decide the way they want the government to be run or not? should the people have a choice when voting? or should they basically be told who they are going to vote for, and not have any real power at all? i think those are fair questions.

The party is built from the working class. It is possible that a leader could betray the masses, however, society is politicised as to an extent that it is no longer the leader as in bourgeois society that constructs society, but that as is the saying of Juche; ‘the masses are the owners of the revolution and construction’. The leader guides an ideological path, but the fate of the country is with the masses. From their work to their governing, they cannot oppose WPK power or the power of the leader, this is because the WPK is their party, the leader is the working classes leader.

ok, this statement here is...a bit weird. you say that the masses are the owners of the revolution, yet the leader (of which they dont have much of a say in) gives them ideological direction, of which they can not go against. it seems like the 86.37% of the people that arent in the party dont have much of a choice, and the ones within the party, even if they dont agree with what is happening currently, cant do much about it since they "cannot oppose WPK power."

For 50 years the masses have heard the socialist view of history and the ideological standpoint of Juche.

and we complain about indoctrination in the US...

Democracy is inherent in socialism, if the country deviates from socialism it will deviate from democracy

i agree here, whole heartedly, but the term democracy seems to take on different flavors when you and i say it.

i understand your ideas about the dictatorship of the proletariat. but, the democracy of the proletariat you speak of doesnt seem to really be in existence. lets look at a figure you put forth earlier:
22 million population, 3 million in the party.
now, if this is correct, than that means that 13.63 % of the population is in the party. and, in elections, you can only vote for people within that party. it doesnt seem like too much of a "mass movement" to me. 13.63% of the population basically running the country? that percentage is even worse than the 25 percent that run america. and, lets say that another 3 million beyond the above 3 million like the party, but have not joined for some reason or another. that makes 6 million. that also only comes to 27.27% of the population running the country. again, even in that sympathetic judgement, it is still a small minority of the country running it. im not seeing the "mass movement," but maybe i am missing something. if i am, then feel free to clear it up for me.

I think you have to be a Marxist-Leninist to agree with the DPRK system.

and that is just another reason why i will never call myself a "marxists-leninist."

(Edited by abstractmentality at 9:21 pm on May 9, 2003)

[Saint-Just]

’3 million members of the party relative to a 22 million population isnt saying much. it is saying, though, that the party is a small minority. and in that, the state means nothing as it is not by the people.

it seems like the 86.37% of the people that arent in the party dont have much of a choice, and the ones within the party, even if they dont agree with what is happening currently, cant do much about it since they "cannot oppose WPK power."

22 million population, 3 million in the party.
now, if this is correct, than that means that 13.63 % of the population is in the party. and, in elections, you can only vote for people within that party. it doesnt seem like too much of a "mass movement" to me. 13.63% of the population basically running the country? that percentage is even worse than the 25 percent that run america. and, lets say that another 3 million beyond the above 3 million like the party, but have not joined for some reason or another. that makes 6 million. that also only comes to 27.27% of the population running the country. again, even in that sympathetic judgement, it is still a small minority of the country running it. im not seeing the "mass movement," but maybe i am missing something. if i am, then feel free to clear it up for me.’

There is 3 million in the party because only 3 million choose to be members of the party. Party membership is irrelevant and gives you no power. It is merely those who wish to actively participate in the political arena, to distribute propaganda and so forth. How much of the U.S. population are members of a political party? Far less I should imagine, how many countries have 27% of their population in political party membership; it only proves how politicised DPRK socialist society is. In every system it is only the government that runs the state politically; you can not expect every member of society to participate in the running of the countries political system.


’particularly concerning democracy and the state, what is your vision of how is should be run? should the people be able to decide the way they want the government to be run or not? should the people have a choice when voting? or should they basically be told who they are going to vote for, and not have any real power at all? i think those are fair questions.’

I do not think people should have a choice between parties when voting for obvious reasons. I think they should have a choice between candidates of course. In the DPRK they are not told who they are going to vote for, of course they cannot remove the WPK from power, or else how will they ever achieve communism? Everyone participates in the running of the state at some level. Indeed I think those with the correct knowledge should influence the workings of society, this is the case in any society. I do not think however that everyone should participate in the running of the government.

’and we complain about indoctrination in the US...’

It is the realisation of the creativity and independence of workers, people should never have the choice to remove socialism or create false history. However, they should be allowed the material conditions for every member of society to contribute to the cultural development and construction of society.

’i agree here, whole heartedly, but the term democracy seems to take on different flavors when you and i say it.’

I believe you have too many of the bourgeois concepts of democracy. I am not trying to insult you, this is what all Marxist-Leninists believe.

’and that is just another reason why i will never call myself a "marxists-leninist."’

What do you call yourself, do you call yourself a Marxist?

I don't know if I can debate with you that well. I am not that intelligent, there are people who would be able to debate this much better, e.g. Kim Jong Il

(Edited by Chairman Mao at 4:44 pm on May 10, 2003)

[kylie]

My view is that what we have in North Korea is a deformed workers state. But still, this is preferable to an imperialist state. So in any struggle between the US and North Korea that may arise, we should support it, and call for its victory in any western intervention. As was the case with Iraq, militarily leftists should support the country, even if politically they do not.

[Wenty]

off the point entirely but abstract mentality - that's kerouac isn't it? good to see he's a legend.

[YKTMX]

Sometimes I despair, I really do.

[abstractmentality]

Chairman Mao:
the 27.27% was a generous number, in actuality the percent of the population in the party is 13.63. the 27 came from me being generous and posing the hypothetical of double the people in the party have likeness in their political ideology to that of the party.

Everyone participates in the running of the state at some level. then...
you can not expect every member of society to participate in the running of the countries political system.

hmmm...

In every system it is only the government that runs the state politically

the question, though, is how much of a say do the people have in this government. now, i can completely see the idea of having on party. that is not my problem with the DPRK. my problem is with party elites choosing who is going to run for a particular office. my problem is, with what you have written about the idea of Juche, that the candidates the people have to choose from dont differ much ideologically wise, and are essentially very, very similar. now, if you have a mass movement for this cause, then things would be much different. however, as i have attempted to show, i do not see a mass movement. we do not, however, know everything about North Korea, so i think this conversation gets a little tricky when written on by two people who dont live in North Korea, or who havent even been there. what i will say, though, is that if, from what i can see, a DPRK style system was installed in the US, i would be just as dissident towards it as i am to the current government.

as far as your thoughts on my writing of indoctrination, i believe you have to give these people a choice. i mean really, this is a revolutionary movement for the people, by the people. it is NOT a minority of the population telling the rest what they want. if the people dont want a socialist society, then it will not work, no matter how "great" a leader is leading.

i would call myself a leftist, as i have told you before. i dont like the term "marxists-leninist," and i think Redstar2000 said it well when he wrote on it a while back. i do not like to get into dogmatisms, as every situation is different; the left dies with dogmatisms.

i would be more than happy to go a round or two with Kim Jung Il, that is if i knew korean, or if he knew english, and if he was willing to go at it. in fact, i know many people on the left that would be more than happy to debate with him.

feoric: is North Korea anti-imperialist, or simply against it now because it is being used against them? i was talking to a comrade today about this, and he mentioned the thought of if the DPRK had the opportunity to act in imperialist ways, would it? i think that needs to be thought of. i agree that we need to support it against US imperialism, i do not, however, think that we should hold it up as a model of what the left wants, i know its not what i want.

Comrade Wenty: it is jack kerouac. i sent you a PM, so hopefully you got it.

(Edited by abstractmentality at 11:43 am on May 13, 2003)

[Saint-Just]

Quote: from abstractmentality on 7:43 pm on May 13, 2003
Chairman Mao:
the 27.27% was a generous number, in actuality the percent of the population in the party is 13.63. the 27 came from me being generous and posing the hypothetical of double the people in the party have likeness in their political ideology to that of the party.

Everyone participates in the running of the state at some level. then...
you can not expect every member of society to participate in the running of the countries political system.

hmmm...

In every system it is only the government that runs the state politically

the question, though, is how much of a say do the people have in this government. now, i can completely see the idea of having on party. that is not my problem with the DPRK. my problem is with party elites choosing who is going to run for a particular office. my problem is, with what you have written about the idea of Juche, that the candidates the people have to choose from dont differ much ideologically wise, and are essentially very, very similar. now, if you have a mass movement for this cause, then things would be much different. however, as i have attempted to show, i do not see a mass movement. we do not, however, know everything about North Korea, so i think this conversation gets a little tricky when written on by two people who dont live in North Korea, or who havent even been there. what i will say, though, is that if, from what i can see, a DPRK style system was installed in the US, i would be just as dissident towards it as i am to the current government.

as far as your thoughts on my writing of indoctrination, i believe you have to give these people a choice. i mean really, this is a revolutionary movement for the people, by the people. it is NOT a minority of the population telling the rest what they want. if the people dont want a socialist society, then it will not work, no matter how "great" a leader is leading.

i would call myself a leftist, as i have told you before. i dont like the term "marxists-leninist," and i think Redstar2000 said it well when he wrote on it a while back. i do not like to get into dogmatisms, as every situation is different; the left dies with dogmatisms.

i would be more than happy to go a round or two with Kim Jung Il, that is if i knew korean, or if he knew english, and if he was willing to go at it. in fact, i know many people on the left that would be more than happy to debate with him.

feoric: is North Korea anti-imperialist, or simply against it now because it is being used against them? i was talking to a comrade today about this, and he mentioned the thought of if the DPRK had the opportunity to act in imperialist ways, would it? i think that needs to be thought of. i agree that we need to support it against US imperialism, i do not, however, think that we should hold it up as a model of what the left wants, i know its not what i want.

Comrade Wenty: it is jack kerouac. i sent you a PM, so hopefully you got it.

(Edited by abstractmentality at 11:43 am on May 13, 2003)


It is the masses that have constructed the DPRK. People did not become politicised in a few years. Material conditions and learning were necessary for politicisation. This politicisation pre-scribes the conditions for an independant and creative society. Without being socialist and politicised the workers cannot release their independance and creativity. Therefore it is only once they have been politicised that they may fully support the construction and revolution.

The revolution was created by a mass movement that recognised the Juche idea put forth by Kim Il Sung in 1937 was the correct path to follow for the inspiration of unity within Korea to finally drive out the Japanese imperialists. Thus the masses chose to follow the path. Yet once sovereignty had been obtained class society still existed and much of the masses were under the influence of bourgeois ideals. The destruction of these bourgeois ideals was necessary for the masses to have choice.

The final stage in which ditatorship is removed is the second stage of communism when the dictatorship is removed and the masses live in a communist paradise. The dictatorship of the proletariat is necessary to reach this stage. This stage of absoulte choice in which there is such an unbuilt socialisation in people that all bourgeois ideas are dead and all choices and freedoms do not negate the happiness of others can only be reached by the suppression of any propensity to revive bourgeois ideals.


I would like to talk with Kim Jong Il too. I was suggesting that he knew the subject better than me. He is a great authority on Juche, and I have learnt much from his works. If you are an excellent debater with your ideas it is possible that you can defeat mine because I am hardly one of the best at arguing Juche.

The conditions of the DPRK have created it into a vehemutly anti-imperialist state. If the path of Marxism-Leninism is followed correctly it is impossible to be imperialist. The DPRK, with the right military power would remove the U.S. forces from Korea, and even go so far as to destroy the American miltary forces entirely as to insure the unfettered existence of all independant states for decades to come.

I agree that you should support the DPRK in the struggle against U.S. imperialism. You may see an escelation of this situation with the Bush regime as it is. The Cold War held the U.S. away from the DPRK for a long time, but it looks under great threat now with the absence of the less aggressive President Clinton and seizure of power by the biggest reactionary tyrant Bush.

[RGacky3]

before this goes any further:
socialism=state control
communism=community control
Thus north Korea, the USSR, Finland, Sweeden, Cuba, vietnam, (old) China, and so on and so forth are all socialist nations,

The paris commune, the Kibuts, the Finnish, Russian, and Chinnese Collective farms and factories are also communist.

THUS no NATION was ever communist. So there we go, north korea is not communist. Its more stalinist, only problem is under stalin the economy and average living standards went way up in the USSR, in north korea, all the money goes not back to the people but to Jim kong and his military. So its socialist, but its also totalitarian and oppressive, THUS not a country we should be supporting.

[ComradeRiley]

we hould support any country that will fight the americans

[abstractmentality]

Quote: from ComradeRiley on 3:51 pm on May 13, 2003
we hould support any country that will fight the americans

so if, lets say, France experienced a revolution tomorrow, and the victors declared itself a fascist state that would go against the US, do you support it?

CM, i will answer you in a bit, im just a little tired right now...

[Saint-Just]

'so if, lets say, France experienced a revolution tomorrow, and the victors declared itself a fascist state that would go against the US, do you support it?'

so if, lets say, France experienced a revolution tomorrow, and the victors declared itself a fascist state that would go against the US, do you support it? So Comrade Riley is correct in my opinion. But that does not necessarily mean I would support a fascist France. Some countries respect the sovereignty of others; some do not, Fascists do not, i addition, a fascist regime is far worse than a capitalist, imperialist regime such as the U.S.

You don't have to answer my posts at all if you don't like abstract, or you can just answer parts of them, or answer in a few days or weeks time. I am usually tired and have little time so I can understand.

RGacky3, we do know the distinction between socialist and communist. We class the DPRK as communist because it is striving for communism.

I have answered such accusations as all money goes to the military and Kim Jong Il numerous times before. If you take a look at the DPRK you can see this is not so, observe what they have achieved besides a powerful military to protect themselves from the ever-present U.S. imperialist threat.

[Saint-Just]

'Everyone participates in the running of the state at some level. then...
you can not expect every member of society to participate in the running of the countries political system.'

State and political system are mutually exclusive in terms of one being the beaurocratic, administrative arm and one being the political arena of government, I should have explained that.

[redstar2000]

The problem in discussing North Korea turns up over and over again: no trustworthy person is "on the ground there" to tell us what is really going on.

We can "mix & match" propaganda from North Korea or the western bourgeoisie all we wish...and it's still idle speculation.

Cuba is surely under as much duress as North Korea, yet it somehow remains "accessible"--even ordinary people (with a bit of difficulty) can go and see for themselves, come back, write articles and books, make videos, etc., etc. Our knowledge of what things are like in Cuba is not as good and certainly not as wide-spread as we would wish...but it is light-years ahead of what we know with any certainty about North Korea.

In the absence of real, verifible information, threads on North Korea end up "hanging in the air". Is it "socialist"? Is it "democratic"? Are people "starving"? Is the electricity on? Etc., etc., etc.

Who knows?

:cool:

[abstractmentality]

firstly, to redstar2000's comment: i agree completely. and that is what i was alluding to in one of my previous post in which i said "we do not, however, know everything about North Korea, so i think this conversation gets a little tricky when written on by two people who dont live in North Korea, or who havent even been there." i was reading an article in a socialist magazine that was published earlier this year on North Korea, and in it they have tons of nice citations. however, some very important numbers were left uncited, as though they came out of the thin air. whenever i have asked someone if they know of any reliable, in depth sources on North Korea (reliable being that which has not been distorted by the right or the left), i have gotten the same answer: it doesnt exist.

Chairman Mao:
i am not sure if you caught what i was alluding to, but that was sort of like my bowing out of this conversation. not enough is known about the DPRK for a truthful conversation about it, especially between you and me.

my example of France was to simply say that not all of enemies of our enemy are out friends. people often use this argument, and it really does get on my nerves.

[Saint-Just]

Quote: from abstractmentality on 9:03 pm on May 15, 2003
firstly, to redstar2000's comment: i agree completely. and that is what i was alluding to in one of my previous post in which i said "we do not, however, know everything about North Korea, so i think this conversation gets a little tricky when written on by two people who dont live in North Korea, or who havent even been there." i was reading an article in a socialist magazine that was published earlier this year on North Korea, and in it they have tons of nice citations. however, some very important numbers were left uncited, as though they came out of the thin air. whenever i have asked someone if they know of any reliable, in depth sources on North Korea (reliable being that which has not been distorted by the right or the left), i have gotten the same answer: it doesnt exist.

Chairman Mao:
i am not sure if you caught what i was alluding to, but that was sort of like my bowing out of this conversation. not enough is known about the DPRK for a truthful conversation about it, especially between you and me.

my example of France was to simply say that not all of enemies of our enemy are out friends. people often use this argument, and it really does get on my nerves.

Ok, well I think quite a large amount is known about the DPRK. I know a number of people who have visited there frequently.

Anyway, yes, we should end this argument.

[The Communist Threat]

haha...propaganda can only go so far...north korea is in deep poverty, while the leader is very rich...it is not communism...but a dictatorship...

Redstar...you talk about going to Cuba with difficulty???..haha, only if you live in the U$...almost every other country can visit there freely...i have flown there myself from Costa Rica with no problems at all...the country is beautiful but the people are very poor do to the lack of resources and i believe that fidel only lives a little higher than those beneath him..while kim jong il does not...and the army of n korea is ridiculous while the rest starve....like i said, propaganda can distort the truth, but it can't make up complete lies about current events...the past is easy to lie about....the present is nearly impossible to completely lie about...

it bothers me to see people call stalin's bureaucracy "socialist"...it was simply a dictatorship for himself...his fucking names means "man of steel" come on...if you have a name like that, you aren't working for the people, but for yourself...killing innocent communist and forcing "communism" on the people is not the way....no one is named a killer in history without cause...if you say that this is all lies about stalin, then maybe hitler wasn't bad at all....he wasn't as bad as he is made out to be..but the jew ran media makes him seem much worse...he was an awful man...but he too helped the economy of bankrupt germany....

[ComradeJunichi]

Quote: from The Communist Threat on 11:02 pm on May 15, 2003
haha...propaganda can only go so far...north korea is in deep poverty, while the leader is very rich...it is not communism...but a dictatorship...

Redstar...you talk about going to Cuba with difficulty???..haha, only if you live in the U$...almost every other country can visit there freely...i have flown there myself from Costa Rica with no problems at all...the country is beautiful but the people are very poor do to the lack of resources and i believe that fidel only lives a little higher than those beneath him..while kim jong il does not...and the army of n korea is ridiculous while the rest starve....like i said, propaganda can distort the truth, but it can't make up complete lies about current events...the past is easy to lie about....the present is nearly impossible to completely lie about...

it bothers me to see people call stalin's bureaucracy "socialist"...it was simply a dictatorship for himself...his fucking names means "man of steel" come on...if you have a name like that, you aren't working for the people, but for yourself...killing innocent communist and forcing "communism" on the people is not the way....no one is named a killer in history without cause...if you say that this is all lies about stalin, then maybe hitler wasn't bad at all....he wasn't as bad as he is made out to be..but the jew ran media makes him seem much worse...he was an awful man...but he too helped the economy of bankrupt germany....

You say "propaganda can only go so far" and all your doing is feeding off of bourgeois media propaganda. It isn't that easy to go to Cuba, you can but it isn't as easy as say...England. You don't have flights from Paris to Havana too often.

Can you provide any evidence about North Korea? Have you read any of the posts in this thread?

[HonkMyDooser]

I know people with firsthand accounts of the North Korean regime..... I cannot even believe you defend it. It is the worst dictatorship since stalin. It isnt communism. Do you defend it because it is called a communist country? Well it isnt. It is a mutated corrupted shadow of communism that it may have supposed to have been.

[ComradeJunichi]

READ the posts in this thread and then reply. So far all your saying is "it's not a communist country, it's evil, more evileristical than Stalin".

[Saint-Just]

Actually, everyone I know who has gone to the DPRK enjoyed it. They said the projects their, the celebrations they saw were unbelievable to western eyes. Since we do not embrace the masses in the same way that is done in the DPRK. They said it is highly progressive, optimistic and joyous country to visit. That their policies were effective, the population worked hard and was under control. That it was extremely refreshing to see everything geared towards the people rather than business, to see no advertising but political statements instead.

Views that the DPRK is oppressive and so forth rely on little evidence, and much are simply political opinions that state-control or media and so on is wrong.

I have refuted all these claims and opinion such as 'the army of n korea is ridiculous while the rest starve'. As Comrade Junichi says you would be well advised to read the rest of this thread if you wish to debate the subject.

Going to the DPRK is quite easy. You need the money of course, and if you are American it is more difficult not because the DPRK do not want Americans but because the U.S. government imposes a travel ban on the country. despite this many Americans have travelled there. Many Koreans from the south have travelled there too. For other countries it is not particularly hard to visit.

[Cassius Clay]

I can't really claim to be a fan of the DPRK. Never the less I'll just point out for such a 'Evil oppressive government' they sure are bad at keeping the people 'brainwashed'. I mean there's a cult for Elvis over there for god's sake.

Even many Marxist groups who are critical of the DPRK, but even they admit that the DPRK has many Socialist aspects to it. Especially before the 90's. I must admit to being very concerned about the SEZ's but that's for another discussion.

Keep up the good work in defending the DPRK comrade CM. Do you plan on visiting it anytime soon?

[ComradeJunichi]

I hope to be able to visit the DPRK with Chairman Mao, in the near future. Chairman Mao and I have talked about it briefly, but lately his ICQ is fucked. I would really enjoy going there.

[The Communist Threat]

haha...not easy to go to cuba eh???..hmm, i might a ticket from san jose to cube fairly easily and without trouble...so, don't be a fucking idiot when it comes to someone that has FIRST person experience with getting to cuba, because obviously you dont....and cuba ia in poverty..or do you claim that to be propaganda too???...o yeah, damn, hitler didn't kill 6million jews either did he...no, thats all lies, he never could have done that...it must have been like 6,000 instead...haha....you believe EVERYTHING you hear about hitler because you HATE him...doublethink is at work here...and doublethink is doubleplusungood

[ComradeJunichi]

Quote: from The Communist Threat on 8:50 pm on May 16, 2003
haha...not easy to go to cuba eh???..hmm, i might a ticket from san jose to cube fairly easily and without trouble...so, don't be a fucking idiot when it comes to someone that has FIRST person experience with getting to cuba, because obviously you dont....and cuba ia in poverty..or do you claim that to be propaganda too???...o yeah, damn, hitler didn't kill 6million jews either did he...no, thats all lies, he never could have done that...it must have been like 6,000 instead...haha....you believe EVERYTHING you hear about hitler because you HATE him...doublethink is at work here...and doublethink is doubleplusungood

haha...not easy to go to cuba eh???..hmm, i might a ticket from san jose to cube fairly easily and without trouble...so, don't be a fucking idiot when it comes to someone that has FIRST person experience with getting to cuba, because obviously you dont

Please, give me a flight from Seoul to Havana. Or maybe a flight from JFK, New York to Havana. How about Tokyo to Havana? Maybe Moscow to Havana? Oh how about London to Havana? Amsterdam to Havana? Ohh, what about Paris to Havana? Toronto to Havana? Sydney to Havana? Beijing to Havana? Berlin to Havana? My point is that it is possible to get to Cuba but not as easy as, for example, London. I know you can get to Cuba, I'm planning on going next year summer. If you would calm down, you'd be able to think while you read my post and understand that it's more difficult than other places.

and cuba ia in poverty..or do you claim that to be propaganda too??

Cuba is still existant, but yes they're economy would not be as high as a first world countries - because it's not. When have I said anything about Cuba's economy?

o yeah, damn, hitler didn't kill 6million jews either did he...no, thats all lies, he never could have done that...it must have been like 6,000 instead...haha....you believe EVERYTHING you hear about hitler because you HATE him

Wow, you're doing too much thinking in your head and it's leading you to think ridiculous thoughts. What the hell does Hitler have to do with anything at all?

doublethink is at work here...and doublethink is doubleplusungood

Idiocy is at work here and idiocy is you.

[Saint-Just]

Quote: from The Communist Threat on 8:50 pm on May 16, 2003
haha...not easy to go to cuba eh???..hmm, i might a ticket from san jose to cube fairly easily and without trouble...so, don't be a fucking idiot when it comes to someone that has FIRST person experience with getting to cuba, because obviously you dont....and cuba ia in poverty..or do you claim that to be propaganda too???...o yeah, damn, hitler didn't kill 6million jews either did he...no, thats all lies, he never could have done that...it must have been like 6,000 instead...haha....you believe EVERYTHING you hear about hitler because you HATE him...doublethink is at work here...and doublethink is doubleplusungood


Unfortunately... or maybe not... I found most of your comment to be incomprehensible.


To Comrade Junichi and Cassius Clay. Yes, I do plan to visit the DPRK soon. I am not sure when, I have enough money at any time; however it is quite expensive and I will have to be paying for University and so forth, and unfortunately its not likely i'll be able to continue working once at university.

I would love to go to the DPRK very much. On all accounts of people who have been there, you can't imagine how amazing it is until you go there. That everyone can dream of socialism, but to see it in action is overwhelming. We must go there Comrade Junichi!

[Dirty Commie]

I have only read right wing distorted lies abouk DPRK, truly, what do the people think of Kim Jung Il, what is the culture like, how does the government work, etc.

[ComradeJunichi]

Yeah, Chairman Mao, we've gotta go sometime! In the near future, within five years?

Dirty Commie, read the posts in this thread itself. Chairman Mao has even explained it in numerous other threads.

[Saint-Just]

Quote: from ComradeJunichi on 11:14 pm on May 16, 2003
Yeah, Chairman Mao, we've gotta go sometime! In the near future, within five years?

Dirty Commie, read the posts in this thread itself. Chairman Mao has even explained it in numerous other threads.

Next five years is what I am thinking. I don't know how much I have explained in this thread, I might have explained a lot.

[Dirty Commie]

I think that yo explained enough about how the government works, but what I'm interested in is how the people feel about the government, what it's like there (as a culture, being so near to China it's probably similar, even though I know next to nothing about Chinese culture except that by birthday lands on a big festival.)

[Saint-Just]

Quote: from Dirty Commie on 4:04 pm on May 17, 2003
I think that yo explained enough about how the government works, but what I'm interested in is how the people feel about the government, what it's like there (as a culture, being so near to China it's probably similar, even though I know next to nothing about Chinese culture except that by birthday lands on a big festival.)

I have written about all this before. But I will again soon, so you can see.

In short though; the DPRK retains a lot of Korean traditions, whilst having adapted from other cultures and having developed its own modern style.

The people there have a mass-orientated outlook. That unity in work, idelogy, desire is progressive. The vast majority of the population have no conflict with the government, as there is no opposition to it, and the WPK carries hews a mass path, one which sees national independance, construction and socialism as most important.

The tense situation currently has led people in povery stricken areas to become dislocated from the government and turn to a far less cohesive system of society, where they have less direction from the government and less comradeship with other members of society. In the majority of areas where material conditions have declined but stayed above poverty discipline and common goals have kept society together.

Masses of people still have great enthusiasm for the government seeing what the masses and the WPK have created in the last 50 years and the threat it is now under.

[Saint-Just]

Abstract Mentality, you asked a question about judicial review.

The reason for the absence of this process may be that they do not desire the role judicial review has. Its primary role to rule on the lawfulness of proceedings in cases, and thus to limit the decisions of the government as to their lawfulness.

Since it is a one party system the power of the government is generally more than that of a multi-party system. Democratic centralism requires that once decisions are made they are not reversed, decisions in the judiciary are subject to the will of the state and the working class agenda and therefore should not come under opposition from individuals. Those accused can defend themselves on the merits of their case, however absence of judicial review means that they cannot question the lawfulness of the case.

In a one-party dictatorship it is naive to assume they could possibly operate judicial review, or that if they did it would have any effect.

[Dirty Commie]

Quote: from Chairman Mao on 5:38 pm on May 17, 2003

Quote: from Dirty Commie on 4:04 pm on May 17, 2003
I think that yo explained enough about how the government works, but what I'm interested in is how the people feel about the government, what it's like there (as a culture, being so near to China it's probably similar, even though I know next to nothing about Chinese culture except that by birthday lands on a big festival.)

I have written about all this before. But I will again soon, so you can see.

In short though; the DPRK retains a lot of Korean traditions, whilst having adapted from other cultures and having developed its own modern style.

The people there have a mass-orientated outlook. That unity in work, idelogy, desire is progressive. The vast majority of the population have no conflict with the government, as there is no opposition to it, and the WPK carries hews a mass path, one which sees national independance, construction and socialism as most important.

The tense situation currently has led people in povery stricken areas to become dislocated from the government and turn to a far less cohesive system of society, where they have less direction from the government and less comradeship with other members of society. In the majority of areas where material conditions have declined but stayed above poverty discipline and common goals have kept society together.

Masses of people still have great enthusiasm for the government seeing what the masses and the WPK have created in the last 50 years and the threat it is now under.


Thanks.

[Saint-Just]

I'm sorry I don't wish to discuss it that broadly, but I have talked about this subject countless times before in depth.

Anyway, I think what you need to know is that the right-wing lies do not revail the positive attitude that has prevailed in Korea. They talk about oppression and starvation and so on, but the starvation particularly is overblown. In the main the countries desire for a homogenous society has led it to be very much one that is happy in its outlook, praising the same truths and working towards the same goals. They have a rich culture and well-designed society. With efficient transport, governance, education system and little social misbehaviour.

People regularly participate in mass-based tasks, in a joyous and orderly manner. They have great knowledge of socialism and of the anti-imperialist struggle and whilst they enjoy full lives they are willing to sacrifice much to defend socialism and their socialist society. They enjoy many of the same activities we do in western society whilst also benefitting from many conditions that only come from a socialist society.

[abstractmentality]

Its primary role to rule on the lawfulness of proceedings in cases, and thus to limit the decisions of the government as to their lawfulness.

i think that best sums it up for me. basically, the government wants all of the power. correct? it just seems to me that this is putting way too much faith in their government, when i dont see any government, past present or future to be worthy of that much trust. the truly totalitarian nature is seeping through. you know, learning about totalitarian regimes, of the left and the right, makes one notice a few things. one of them is the great "confidence" and "patriotism" in their "great leaders." (one thing i refer to here is the short book Patriotism by Yukio Mishima.) in my eyes, nothing to be proud of. reading Patriotism today, i can see where the character is coming from, but i can also see the massive naivete involved in his thought...

(Edited by abstractmentality at 10:14 pm on May 20, 2003)

[thursday night]

Going to Cuba from Canada is very easy. There are direct flights out of Vancouver and Toronto all the time. Be sure to check out AirTransat, they are the cheapest though...it shows.

Chairman Mao, it is indeed amazing to be liberated as you see socialism with your own eyes. I hope that all proper comrades one day get to feel the feeling. Anyways, I too would enjoy travelling to the DPRK though I haven't seen any websites regarding travel and airlines there. Perhaps you could direct me?

[Cassius Clay]

Thursday I think you need to go to China first of all and then fly onto Korea. Infact now that I come to think about it I would myself really like to go. I have many doubts over the DPRK seeing it with my own eyes would be better. On a note the BBC, CNN and what have you allways enjoy showing military parades, they never show the everyday life, particularly in Pyongang where they most likely enjoy life the same as they do here in the west. Ofcourse they love to complain about whatever material shortcomings there is in the DPRK but they will never point out to the rest of South East Asia, you can see despair, famine, oppression and poverty all you want in the Phillipines, India or Cambodia.

Anyway CM got any details? How much will it cost.

[thursday night]

http://www.lonelyplanet.com/destinations/n...ia/north_korea/ (http://www.lonelyplanet.com/destinations/north_east_asia/north_korea/)

A very interesting read!

[Saint-Just]

There used to be flights from Berlin and Moscow, but the U.S. and imperialists in those countries organised it so that there would be flights no longer. There were flights from Berlin and Moscow up to the mid 90's, some years after the destruction of socialism in the DDR and USSR.

Info on travelling to the DPRK and all requirements:

http://www.chollima-group.com/

http://www.koryogroup.com/

http://www.vnc.nl/korea/

You need to travel to Beijing now since the closure of the other routes. The cost of the entire trip, the flights to Beijing, hotel in DPRK, meals, your guides etc. is around £1000. It varies depending on how many people you travel with and so on. That may sound expensive, however any trip to east Asia for a week with hotel accomadation will cost similar. So the cost is basically realistic, and considering the meals, guides, transport etc. quite reasonable.

The international organisation; Korean Friendship Organisation organises groups to visit. It is best to go at the time when there are celebrations.... nearly every year they celebrate, this year it is 50th anniversary of the anti-japanese struggle for liberation.

Its quite easy for me as I know people who visit every year in large groups and fortunately they are treated as VIP's as members of Juche and Korean Friendship groups.


(Edited by Chairman Mao at 11:21 am on May 22, 2003)

[thursday night]

Also, if anybody is interested in also travelling to Cuba they can message me and I can provide them with links regarding airlines and also hotels and hints for good eating and things to see. I'd be happy to help.

[YKTMX]

You lot are all fucking nuts.

[Cassius Clay]

'You lot are all fucking nuts'


Why?

[Saint-Just]

Quote: from YouKnowTheyMurderedX on 3:20 pm on May 22, 2003
You lot are all fucking nuts.


I suppose being the die-hard revolutionary you would rather visit New York or Las Vegas.

(Edited by Chairman Mao at 5:26 pm on May 22, 2003)

[thursday night]

Yes...I am nuts. Nevertheless, I don't have Leon Trotsky as my avatar.

[redstar2000]

I guess I'm responsible for the "tourist angle" that this thread went in...and I apologize.

The reason for my apology is that I don't believe you actually learn very much about a place as a tourist.

I was in Cuba for two months...but as a guest of the Cuban Government. I certainly learned a lot...perhaps more than 99% of my fellow Americans who never went. But looking back, I'm painfully conscious of the fact that I didn't learn and don't know to this day what it is really like to live in Cuba as a Cuban.

If you really want to know what a place is like, I think you have to learn the hard way. Go there for an indefinite stay, know or learn the language, get a real job there...and talk to as many people as you can. Find out how things really work there.

To spend a week in a western generic 4-star hotel taking whirlwind guided tours will teach you only a small amount, at best, about the place you're visiting. That's just as true of Paris as it is of P'yongyang.

Of course, if you're making a pilgrimage, that doesn't matter. The important point is that you were there.

Otherwise, I'm really not a big fan of tourism and would discourage it if I could.

:cool:

[thursday night]

I’m not sure if I entirely agree with you redstar2000, but I see your approach and I understand in some ways. I believe there are two ways to travel as a ‘tourist.’ The first is (let us use Cuba as an example, since you and I have both been there) to travel to Veradero, stay in a resort, eat hamburgers, drink beer and sit on the beach and watch women walk by in bikinis. In doing so you can of course say you have been to Cuba, but really you’ve seen nothing you probably couldn’t see in a hundred other places in the world.

The second way of traveling (and this is the way I generally travel, and certainly the way I went to Cuba) is to go to Cuba and take a taxi to Havana and stay in a bed and breakfast, a small hotel or with a family. Do not go on any highly organized tours. Talk to the people (I never had to approach people, they approached me), and so on and so on. I believe that somebody can do this and indeed feel as if they have felt what Cuba, or whatever nation they have journeyed to, is like.

In my opinion it really comes down to what you define as a tourist. By the way, how did you manage to get invited as a guest of the people’s government in Cuba?

[redstar2000]

I was one of 84 people invited by Cuba essentially to twist the nose of Uncle Sam; by breaking the U.S. travel ban, we were "living propaganda" for which country was really "freer".

You are quite right about Cubans approaching you everywhere; there were even a couple of anti-Castro Cubans who approached me in the hotel bar in Santa Clara.

But I think, looking back, that it would have been better to go with one or two friends (fluent in Spanish) and just poke around. I saw a lot of geography but less politics than I wished.

I did spend a day and an evening in Veradero...but it was still Cuban then, long before the massive hotel building spree.

Again, looking back, I kind of wished I'd checked out a few job openings...

:cool:

[abstractmentality]

im sorry i have got to bring this thread back up, but i was just doing some reading, and thought it would make a decent post and question. so then, as Chairman Mao wrote earlier in this thread (p. 2):
Party officials are now better off because the tense economic situation had put compromise to order and retaining the socialist system in the country. The standards of living of officials is seen as a priority to maintain currently. Party officials do not have luxurious standards of living, apart from those on the central committee and other top state officials. But the standars of living of party officials is maintained at a reasonable level.

so, in essence, party officials are better off then the proletariat. and, beyond that, the "central committee and other top state officials" are not included in my last sentence, and experience better life then regular party officials. now, Chairman Mao, you have told me that i do not understand or do not agree with your thoughts on the DPRK because i am not a "Marxist-leninist," but reading through The State and Revolution right now, it seems as though Lenin and Marx were very much against the better treatment of party officials at any level.

"So were the officials of all other branches of the administration. From the members of the Commune downwards, the public service had to be done at workmen's wages" - Karl Marx, The Civil War in France (Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, Selected Works, Vol. 2, Moscow, 1973, pp. 217-21) [Lenin uses this quote in The State and Revolution]

Lenin goes on to write:

"Capitalist culture has created large-scale production, factories, railways, the postal service, telephones, etc., and on this basis the great majority of the functions of the old "state power" have become so simplified and can be reduced to such exceedingly simple operations of registration, filing, and checking that they can be easily performed by every literate person, can quite easily be performed for ordinary "workmen's wages", and that these functions can (and must) be stripped of every shadow of privilege, of every semblance of "official grandeur".

All officials, without exception, elected and subject to recall at any time, their salaries reduced to the level of ordinary "workmen's wages" — these simple and "self-evident" democratic measures, while completely uniting the interests of the workers and the majority of the peasants, at the same time serve as a bridge leading from capitalism to socialism." (http://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/work...aterev/ch03.htm (http://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1917/sep/staterev/ch03.htm))(this link also shows where i got the Marx quote from)

this seems very much against the "marxist-leninist" principles displayed in the DPRK....

(Edited by abstractmentality at 11:07 pm on May 26, 2003)


(Edited by abstractmentality at 11:08 pm on May 26, 2003)

[Saint-Just]

Quote: from abstractmentality on 7:05 am on May 27, 2003
im sorry i have got to bring this thread back up, but i was just doing some reading, and thought it would make a decent post and question. so then, as Chairman Mao wrote earlier in this thread (p. 2):
Party officials are now better off because the tense economic situation had put compromise to order and retaining the socialist system in the country. The standards of living of officials is seen as a priority to maintain currently. Party officials do not have luxurious standards of living, apart from those on the central committee and other top state officials. But the standars of living of party officials is maintained at a reasonable level.

so, in essence, party officials are better off then the proletariat. and, beyond that, the "central committee and other top state officials" are not included in my last sentence, and experience better life then regular party officials. now, Chairman Mao, you have told me that i do not understand or do not agree with your thoughts on the DPRK because i am not a "Marxist-leninist," but reading through The State and Revolution right now, it seems as though Lenin and Marx were very much against the better treatment of party officials at any level.

"So were the officials of all other branches of the administration. From the members of the Commune downwards, the public service had to be done at workmen's wages" - Karl Marx, The Civil War in France (Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, Selected Works, Vol. 2, Moscow, 1973, pp. 217-21) [Lenin uses this quote in The State and Revolution]

Lenin goes on to write:

"Capitalist culture has created large-scale production, factories, railways, the postal service, telephones, etc., and on this basis the great majority of the functions of the old "state power" have become so simplified and can be reduced to such exceedingly simple operations of registration, filing, and checking that they can be easily performed by every literate person, can quite easily be performed for ordinary "workmen's wages", and that these functions can (and must) be stripped of every shadow of privilege, of every semblance of "official grandeur".

All officials, without exception, elected and subject to recall at any time, their salaries reduced to the level of ordinary "workmen's wages" — these simple and "self-evident" democratic measures, while completely uniting the interests of the workers and the majority of the peasants, at the same time serve as a bridge leading from capitalism to socialism." (http://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/work...aterev/ch03.htm (http://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1917/sep/staterev/ch03.htm))(this link also shows where i got the Marx quote from)

this seems very much against the "marxist-leninist" principles displayed in the DPRK....

(Edited by abstractmentality at 11:07 pm on May 26, 2003)


(Edited by abstractmentality at 11:08 pm on May 26, 2003)


If party officials had to subsist on the levels of ordinary workers they may well be in poor conditions. Many workers live in reasonable to relatively poor conditions. Party officials living standards are maintained as being reasonable since it is integral to maintain their loyalty in such pressured times. If the DPRK was in better circumstances this would be different.

To be a party official, whatever deprived area of the country you live in you will be guaranteed a living standard that is generally better than the workers and that does not fluctuate. Despite this workers for the main part still aspire to further the aspirations of the nation.

I said 'Party officials do not have luxurious standards of living'

and 'standars of living of party officials is maintained at a reasonable level.'

I agree with what Marx and Lenin say, and I have read works from Kim Jong Il that say the same, I can find quotes but they are in books and so difficult to find. He basically says that it is integral that party officials operate amongst the workers and with the same living standards as workers but where the standards of living for workers are not of a good enough standard that the socialist system needs to provide party officials should have priority over accomodation and provisions.

As to those on the central committee and other top level officials, this is amongst a few people. They have good standards of living not at great expense of the masses of workers. DPRK is not an advanced capitalist nation, they do not have exceptionally luxurious surroundings.

Lenin himself enjoyed an effectively run top-level of state power that could afford to givbe its top-level officials good living standards. To run the top-level of state you need such things as air and road transport, good accomodation and so on.

As to Marx's statement, it is unclear. But yes, party officials get what the state should be able to afford to all workers (but can't - can only give to some). It is like this because of the great pressure the DPRK is under economically. They do not enjoy excessive standards of living; there are 3 million party members, and it is key not to let them starve or have poor housing or go through periods of this such as was in the early 90's in the forced march when workers had to increase their hours and reduce their standards of living so the country could invest to see longer term growth as the imperialists increased their pressure upon the DPRK to crumble internally.

The DPRK desires the same as Marx and Lenin, however it has to alter the path of perfection to have socialism survive. Not adapting ideas for different situations or compromising your ideal beliefs is called dogmatism and is an enemy of the working-class. Lenin was certainly not dogmatic as can be seen from such instances as NEP where as Trotsky and his cohort, opposed such measures.

[thursday night]

The Road to Socialism is a path that is never an idential trail in whatever country it is walked upon. In walking upon it and building the Road to Socialism, there are many changes, compromises and struggles that must be adapted for the ultimate success of a people's revolution.

[abstractmentality]

We can all agree that dogmatism is not our friend. this is something that has gotten under my skin for some time now, and im glad that we can all agree on this issue. my bringing up of Lenins thoughts in State and Revolution is simply because this is supposed to be his masterpiece. this ecompasses many of his ideas, and to truly call oneself a "Leninist" is to believe in the validity of this book.

I dont see anything wrong with adaption, however, the direction in which that adaption is taken is what makes it ok, or not. this adaption, i do not see as "ok," perhaps because of the way you describe it. i have gotten the feeling that the party is now a different class. with the establishement of different wages for different levels of government relative to others in the government and the workers, the DPRK has essentially created a new class. The left is about dissolving classes, not creating new ones. As quoted in State and Revolution, Marx wrote of the state as "the proletariat organized as the ruling class." (http://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1917/sep/staterev/ch02.htm) Contrary to this, the DPRK has created a new class to be the state.

Throughout much of the second chapter of State and Revolution, Lenin makes reference to this idea of the proletariat being the working class over and over again. one of his main items of discussion in the second chapter is of this idea. This is an integral idea that is put forward, and essential to the work as a whole.

I do not see how you can say that Marx' quote is unclear. He clearly states that the "public service had to be done at workmen's wages." If this is ambiguous to you, then im sorry. he cleary says that the state must be run on workmans wages.

in my eyes, if i am a worker in the DPRK, and i am having a difficult time feeding my family, and i look down the street to the party official that does not have to worry about feeding his/her family, then i feel that the party official is more important than me, the worker. This feeling is based on material conditions that are obvious. this feeling, also, is somewhat similar to that felt by the working class in capitalist countries. the working class in conscious capitalist countries feels that they are unfairly treated relative to the people who dont have to worry about feeding their families; essentially a class conflict. it seems as though this feeling would also be found in North Korea. creating new artificial class anatgonism against the workers is not something i support.

once again, i will go with what i have been saying this whole time: you can not force communism in places that are not ready, or have grown to become not ready. although some sort of succes may arise, the success will be ephemeral.

(Edited by abstractmentality at 9:11 pm on May 27, 2003)

[canikickit]

so, in essence, party officials are better off then the proletariat. and, beyond that, the "central committee and other top state officials" are not included in my last sentence, and experience better life then regular party officials.

That really is the crux of the matter.
I agree 100% abstract. Great post.


If party officials had to subsist on the levels of ordinary workers they may well be in poor conditions. Many workers live in reasonable to relatively poor conditions. Party officials living standards are maintained as being reasonable since it is integral to maintain their loyalty in such pressured times.

As abstract pointed out and is betrayed by your language, Chairman Mao, what you are talking about are two different classes. It is unfortunate that North Korea is in bad circumstances, but this will not distort the reality of the situation.

That is why the authority must be as dispersed as much as possible. There must be more party officials. The entire population has to be party officials at some time. Shift work if necessary.

What do "party officials" do?
are the guys who clean the streets, and the toilets after Mr. Jong Il , and serve him dinner considered party officials? What about the farmers that make sure there are eggs and sausages for him to eat for an Irish breakfast? Are they considered party members? Should they be?

I understand the point you are making. It does not make me feel happy for the people of North Korea.
I don't think the excuse is good enough.
Of course, I do not know about North Korea particularily, I am just responding to what you have conveyed.

[Saint-Just]

I have not time to respond to all of this.

Anyway, in these circumstances the DPRK cannot follow the true path to socialism in this area because first they must ensure the survival of the very roots of socialism in the country, the power of the WPK as a working-class party and the soveriegnty of the country.

They have departed from these ideals of Lenin and Marx at this stage, but Lenin and Marx did not predict the precise circumstances of the DPRK. The State and Revolution can be followed as one of the most important guidelines in state-building, but sometimes it becomes impossible to adhere to correctly. They have departed from these ideas of The State and Revolution for now, but for many other ideas they stay loyal.

Dogmatism is an enemy in that it denies we consider any other approach and end having nothing more than old-fashioned, failing ideas.

Simply the DPRK has to choose this path to protect socialism for the future. I am positive that these arguments took place in the SPA, central committee and politburo but that in the end this policy was decided upon, whether correct or not it must be followed to test its validity and if circumstances change we can hope that criticism of this policy arrives to revert back to a more socialism path.