Should the left be more ardently critical

[Dr Mindbender]

I hate to sidetrack revolutionary sentiment, however that is not my intention I am more than aware who the real bad guys are. History aside though, its arguable that second to China, North Korea and the Juche system are most responsible for dragging the good name of socialism through the dirt. Its people are starving, it has more reactionary border controls than anywhere and it is hardly enjoying the benefit of a class free society all of which to the extent that its become common practice for our idealogical opponents to use the DPRK as the attypical textbook example of why communism 'is a failure' and why 'communism doesnt work'. I have seen within the broad left complacency on this to the point of apologism. So the question is, should we be more vocal in our calling for the downfall of this authoritarian shambles?

[Wanted Man]

Originally posted by Ulster Socialist+September 21, 2007 09:46 pm--> (Ulster Socialist @ September 21, 2007 09:46 pm) I have seen within the broad left complacency on this to the point of apologism. [/b]
Who? Where? When? Why?


US
So the question is, should we be more vocal in our calling for the downfall of this authoritarian shambles?
Who are "we"? How should it fall down? What should it be replaced by? Is that realistic in the long term?

[Dr Mindbender]

Regardless of what it labels itself, is the continuation of this state really the most progressive way forward for these people? I think the best thing they can hope for is the death of the 'dear leader' and a de-centralisation of power, rather like the system of democracy operated in China.

[Wanted Man]

Umm, you didn't answer any of my questions (except for the last two, but your answer didn't relate to the other ones, nor did it relate to your first post). You just trailed off in meaningless jargon.

(hint: this is where you admit that you have no leg to stand on: clearly there is no "complacency" or "apologism" regarding the DPRK among "the broad left". Why did you even start this thread?)

[Dr Mindbender]

Originally posted by Dick [email protected] 21, 2007 09:10 pm
Umm, you didn't answer any of my questions (except for the last two, but your answer didn't relate to the other ones, nor did it relate to your first post).

(hint: this is where you admit that you have no leg to stand on: clearly there is no "complacency" or "apologism" regarding the DPRK among "the broad left". Why did you even start this thread?)
if you are in the UK, go to the Sparticans and ask them their view on the DPRK. I wasnt specifically referring to any comrades on this forum, if thats what you thought I meant.

I started this thread to get a perspective on what everyone thought. The fact you are questioning my motives pretty much proves my original point.

[Karl Marx's Camel]

The Stalinist experiments have been the greatest catastrophe for the working class movement, ever.

I wonder if we even can recover, and when that will be. Our good name has like you said been dragged through dirt, and that dirt sticks like glue.

[Enragé]

Originally posted by Ulster [email protected] 21, 2007 08:58 pm
Regardless of what it labels itself, is the continuation of this state really the most progressive way forward for these people? I think the best thing they can hope for is the death of the 'dear leader' and a de-centralisation of power, rather like the system of democracy operated in China.
what democracy in china are you referring too

[Dr Mindbender]

Originally posted by NKOS+September 22, 2007 01:02 am--> (NKOS @ September 22, 2007 01:02 am)
Ulster [email protected] 21, 2007 08:58 pm
Regardless of what it labels itself, is the continuation of this state really the most progressive way forward for these people? I think the best thing they can hope for is the death of the 'dear leader' and a de-centralisation of power, rather like the system of democracy operated in China.
what democracy in china are you referring too [/b]
People in the different towns and villages are allowed to elect their own delegate to represent them in the central committee. Its basically the chinese equivalent of parliamentaryism.

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

Communists defend the gains made in the DPRK, namely the ouster of the capitalist class and imperialist domination and the formation of a centrally planned, collectivized economy against imperialism while at the same fighting to oust Kim Jong Il and the rest of the bureaucracy (which can best be done by carrying out successful revolutions in other countries, breaking the DPRK out of isolation and creating political openings for workers and farmers, and ridding the bureaucracy of an excuse for maintaining current undemocratic structures)/

[Dr Mindbender]

In the DPRK they have only succeeded in replacing the capitalist class with a state capitalist class as with other stalinist monstrosities. There is still a class heirarchy over there, ie the army is in control over everyone else. Lets not be fooled into believing the Juche government is a progressive state. Its mere existance serves only as an embarressment to global socialism.

[spartan]

US:
There is still a class heirarchy over there, ie the army is in control over everyone else.
Yeah they have had a so called "Military first" policy since the early 90's which involves alot of there money going to the military first. Believe it or not right into the 80's the DPRK was a richer nation than south Korea and the north frequently gave free aid to south Korea during natural disasters etc (But you wont here that from the US and yet the US never misses an opportunity to say that they always give aid to the DPRK).

[Dr Mindbender]

If only they put their people first then their political adversaries would have less ground to criticise them. Who knows, rather than their own people trying to flee in their droves more westerners might want to defect there to enjoy the benefits of a class free society. But it wont happen now thanks to that decadent asshole Kim Il Sung. What a wasted opportunity.

[awayish]

absolutely critical of all things unproductive to human emancipation and healthy community, regardless of ideological label. else, what are you fighting for.

[Axel1917]

Originally posted by Ulster [email protected] 22, 2007 10:41 pm
In the DPRK they have only succeeded in replacing the capitalist class with a state capitalist class as with other stalinist monstrosities. There is still a class heirarchy over there, ie the army is in control over everyone else. Lets not be fooled into believing the Juche government is a progressive state. Its mere existance serves only as an embarressment to global socialism.
You can't have state capitalism because with the expropriation of the bourgeoisie, you replace social production with an individual mode of appropriation with social production with state appropriation - you eliminate the social production and individual appropriation contradiction inherent in capitalism, a defining feature of it. I defend the basic gains of the planned economy and the expropriation of the bourgeoisie in North Korea, while at the same time, point out the need for a political revolution against the Stalinist regime there to save the planned economy, make it democratic for the workers, and spread the revolution.

And since when have living standards been good when a capitalist regime replaces a Stalinist one? I believe they typically fall by far. Capitalism is not taking Africa anywhere, so I doubt that the DPRK would get any better if a capitalist counter-revolution succeeded. In fact, things would be probably even worse than they are now. Either that or they could possibly get "absorbed" into the South, only to end up having all kinds of unemployment and other such problems (I have heard that this is still the case in what used to be the DDR.).

[Dr Mindbender]

Originally posted by [email protected] 27, 2007 05:27 pm
Capitalism is not taking Africa anywhere, so I doubt that the DPRK would get any better if a capitalist counter-revolution succeeded.
Did they even have a successful revolution in the first place?

[manic expression]

Originally posted by Karl Marx's [email protected] 21, 2007 09:19 pm
The Stalinist experiments have been the greatest catastrophe for the working class movement, ever.

I wonder if we even can recover, and when that will be. Our good name has like you said been dragged through dirt, and that dirt sticks like glue.
Oh for crying out loud, what "good name" are you talking about? Working class movements HAVE ALWAYS been demonized and WILL ALWAYS be demonized so long as there is a class opposed to them. You make it sound as if communism was cherished by all in some misty past. It was always given a bad name by the bourgeoisie and their allies. Drop the whole woe-is-my-formerly-beloved-ideology act.

[Dr Mindbender]

Originally posted by manic expression+September 27, 2007 10:39 pm--> (manic expression @ September 27, 2007 10:39 pm)
Karl Marx's [email protected] 21, 2007 09:19 pm
The Stalinist experiments have been the greatest catastrophe for the working class movement, ever.

I wonder if we even can recover, and when that will be. Our good name has like you said been dragged through dirt, and that dirt sticks like glue.
Oh for crying out loud, what "good name" are you talking about? Working class movements HAVE ALWAYS been demonized and WILL ALWAYS be demonized so long as there is a class opposed to them. You make it sound as if communism was cherished by all in some misty past. It was always given a bad name by the bourgeoisie and their allies. Drop the whole woe-is-my-formerly-beloved-ideology act. [/b]
The point is whenever regimes under the guise of socialism fuck up, let alone fuck up as badly to the extent that N.Korea has it doesnt help us sell the idea any.

[Comrade Rage]

Seriously. Our movement can't be determined by a desire to look good to the capitalist media, etc.

[Dr Mindbender]

Originally posted by COMRADE [email protected] 27, 2007 10:43 pm
Seriously. Our movement can't be determined by a desire to look good to the capitalist media, etc.
im not referring to the capitalist media, Im referring to joe average on the street.
Wether or not we like it, the cappie media has a direct influence on what joe thinks.

[manic expression]

Originally posted by Ulster [email protected] 27, 2007 10:42 pm
The point is whenever regimes under the guise of socialism fuck up, let alone fuck up as badly to the extent that N.Korea has it doesnt help us sell the idea any.
The point is that people are worried about taking on capitalist mindsets and lies. Why are people so intimidated by these issues? It's as if to say: if only there were never any attempts, there would be nothing to defend! Many "leftists" want nothing more than to bask in the innocence inherent in impotence. It's about standing up to lies and misconceptions instead of mourning their existence.

And plus, the simple fact is that socialists HAVE ALWAYS HAD TO DO THIS. Read the Manifesto, Marx confronts the SAME EXACT MISCONCEPTIONS in 1848 (before the proletarian uprising at that!) that people are so daunted by today. This is nothing new, the same obstacles had to be overcome in all periods of our struggle. Join it.

[Dr Mindbender]

The USSR was the first 'communist' state (prior to 1924) so in the longer historical perspective, its relatively new.

[Comrade Rage]

Originally posted by Ulster Socialist+September 27, 2007 05:45 pm--> (Ulster Socialist @ September 27, 2007 05:45 pm)
COMRADE [email protected] 27, 2007 10:43 pm
Seriously. Our movement can't be determined by a desire to look good to the capitalist media, etc.
im not referring to the capitalist media, Im referring to joe average on the street.
Wether or not we like it, the cappie media has a direct influence on what joe thinks. [/b]
Believe me I realize that. We need to develop an effective way to get our points of view out there to him.

However that is a problem we must solve on our own. Kim Jong Il's major concern is how to effectively run his country and keep it free from So. Korean spies. I will not criticize him for 'starving his own people', when quite frankly the Americans are occupying the food-producing regions of Korea, have introduced illegal sanctions upon the DPRK, and cut aid. It is AMERICA who is starving No. Korea!

[Dr Mindbender]

Originally posted by COMRADE CRUM+September 27, 2007 11:02 pm--> (COMRADE CRUM @ September 27, 2007 11:02 pm)
Originally posted by Ulster [email protected] 27, 2007 05:45 pm

COMRADE [email protected] 27, 2007 10:43 pm
Seriously. Our movement can't be determined by a desire to look good to the capitalist media, etc.
im not referring to the capitalist media, Im referring to joe average on the street.
Wether or not we like it, the cappie media has a direct influence on what joe thinks.
Believe me I realize that. We need to develop an effective way to get our points of view out there to him.

However that is a problem we must solve on our own. Kim Jong Il's major concern is how to effectively run his country and keep it free from So. Korean spies. I will not criticize him for 'starving his own people', when quite frankly the Americans are occupying the food-producing regions of Korea, have introduced illegal sanctions upon the DPRK, and cut aid. It is AMERICA who is starving No. Korea! [/b]
yes i agree, America is largely to blame (mostly actually), but what pisses me off about the internal situation is that fat asshat Kim calls himself a socialist while he lives in a grandiose mansion while his people are starving to death. Surely any self respecting socialist would distribute their food and essentials?

[manic expression]

Originally posted by Ulster [email protected] 27, 2007 11:00 pm
The USSR was the first 'communist' state (prior to 1924) so in the longer historical perspective, its relatively new.
So you're saying that socialists prior to 1917 never had to answer to common misconceptions about their movement? There was no slander of the socialist cause before the storming of the Winter Palace? Further, are you saying that socialism, as a movement, would be in a better place today without the working class revolution of Russia?

Why should we be so timid about supporting our movement's history now? Far from lamenting these events, we should be grateful for their examples and contributions.

[Dr Mindbender]

Originally posted by manic expression+September 27, 2007 11:08 pm--> (manic expression @ September 27, 2007 11:08 pm)
Ulster [email protected] 27, 2007 11:00 pm
The USSR was the first 'communist' state (prior to 1924) so in the longer historical perspective, its relatively new.
So you're saying that socialists prior to 1917 never had to answer to common misconceptions about their movement? There was no slander of the socialist cause before the storming of the Winter Palace? Further, are you saying that socialism, as a movement, would be in a better place today without the working class revolution of Russia?

[/b]
No Im saying that socialism would be better off today had it not been for the death of bolshevism in 1924 and the triumph of stalinism.

[Comrade Rage]

Originally posted by Ulster Socialist+September 27, 2007 06:05 pm--> (Ulster Socialist @ September 27, 2007 06:05 pm)
Originally posted by COMRADE [email protected] 27, 2007 11:02 pm

Originally posted by Ulster [email protected] 27, 2007 05:45 pm

COMRADE [email protected] 27, 2007 10:43 pm
Seriously. Our movement can't be determined by a desire to look good to the capitalist media, etc.
im not referring to the capitalist media, Im referring to joe average on the street.
Wether or not we like it, the cappie media has a direct influence on what joe thinks.
Believe me I realize that. We need to develop an effective way to get our points of view out there to him.

However that is a problem we must solve on our own. Kim Jong Il's major concern is how to effectively run his country and keep it free from So. Korean spies. I will not criticize him for 'starving his own people', when quite frankly the Americans are occupying the food-producing regions of Korea, have introduced illegal sanctions upon the DPRK, and cut aid. It is AMERICA who is starving No. Korea!
yes i agree, America is largely to blame (mostly actually), but what pisses me off about the internal situation is that fat asshat Kim calls himself a socialist while he lives in a grandiose mansion while his people are starving to death. Surely any self respecting socialist would distribute their food and essentials? [/b]
Yeah I find that guy to be bourgeosie and repugnant. He also likes American movies, fancy wines, etc. He's about as socialist as George Bush's right foot.

Bad taste in sunglasses too. :lol:

[manic expression]

Originally posted by Ulster [email protected] 27, 2007 11:10 pm
No Im saying that socialism would be better off today had it not been for the death of bolshevism in 1924 and the triumph of stalinism.
In spite of the Stalinist deformation of the Soviet Union, it should still be defended. Why? First, the Soviet Union aided revolutionary working class movements throughout the world: Cuba is one good example of this (as is Spain, although without the successful outcome). Without the Soviet Union, socialists everywhere would have had less resources to work with. That is positive. Second, the progressive property relations of the USSR made life better for the workers. A quick comparison of life in Russia today to life in Russia before 1990 is proof enough. Capitalism has sunken its fangs into the whole of the former Soviet Union, and so its fall was nothing less than devestating for the workers.

Of course I hate the Stalinist triumph as much as anyone, but that does not mean we should write off the Soviet Union completely or refuse to defend it when necessary.

[spartan]

manic expression:
In spite of the Stalinist deformation of the Soviet Union, it should still be defended. Why? First, the Soviet Union aided revolutionary working class movements throughout the world: Cuba is one good example of this (as is Spain, although without the successful outcome).
The USSR only helped the non revolutionary Bourgeoisie elements of the Communist parties in Spain. Indeed the USSR only helped these various movements in Spain on the condition that they set up Liberal Bourgeoisie Capitalist Democracies! as they did not want to upset there military allies and Spains neighbour France amongst other reasons. I suggest you read George Orwells Homage To Catalonia to give yourself a better understanding of the Spanish civil war and its often confusing politics.

[PRC-UTE]

Our criticisms would only be called for if there were say, in whatever country we inhabit, a large workers' party looking to the DPRK as a source of inspiration or model. We would argue it is not a worthy model.

Other than that, any criticism could simply be fueling a war effort against the DPRK, which we should oppose.

We have to think about what our criticism of the DPRK is meant to achieve - not just adopting a critical stance for the sake of it.

[Wanted Man]

Originally posted by Ulster [email protected] 21, 2007 10:13 pm
if you are in the UK, go to the Sparticans and ask them their view on the DPRK. I wasnt specifically referring to any comrades on this forum, if thats what you thought I meant.

I started this thread to get a perspective on what everyone thought. The fact you are questioning my motives pretty much proves my original point.
Who are the Sparticans? Why would I "go to" such an ineffectual sect? What is their actual influence? Where is the "complacency" in the "broad left"?

I'm "questioning your motives" because you're arguing from a false premise. If you simply don't like NK (I personally agree with CdL's position), just say so, and we'll talk. There's no need to use big words if you don't have anything big to say.

The whole thing just reminds me of something that was in the news here a while ago. An organization had picked two politicians. The one who spoke with the most clarity, and the one who deliberately obscured his statements by using jargon and making up new compound words. I think we need that on RevLeft.

By the way, you will get a lot more attention and agreement if you use plain proletarian English, the present tense and the active voice. Your OP sounds contrived. Just a tip. Writing style is pretty important. Pick up a newspaper (journalists deal with this thing daily :P) and see how it's done.

[OneBrickOneVoice]

The Revolutionary Left needs to stop using all these bullshit excuses for siding with the imperialists against resistance from oppressed nations. The DPRK is a example of a country fighting imperialism, in the toughest conditions imaginable. A state where dispite, sanctions, occupation, a basic embargo and no aid, admist all the crimes being perpetrated on the DPRK, it builds socialism and collectivizes agriculture, provides the masses with staple food, and fights back against the sweatshop horrors where workers are turned into slaves by imperialism as other countries which have taken sharp concessions to imperialism have suffered from. The DPRK suffers in other ways, but at least it is independent and in control of itself, and a symbol that it is possible for countries to break out of this system

[awayish]

Originally posted by manic expression+September 27, 2007 11:08 pm--> (manic expression @ September 27, 2007 11:08 pm)
Ulster [email protected] 27, 2007 11:00 pm
The USSR was the first 'communist' state (prior to 1924) so in the longer historical perspective, its relatively new.
So you're saying that socialists prior to 1917 never had to answer to common misconceptions about their movement? There was no slander of the socialist cause before the storming of the Winter Palace? Further, are you saying that socialism, as a movement, would be in a better place today without the working class revolution of Russia?

Why should we be so timid about supporting our movement's history now? Far from lamenting these events, we should be grateful for their examples and contributions. [/b]
if you can't even convince socialists to include, well, fascists and murderers, into 'our movement,' what sort of a change do you stand against people who do not follow marx like moses.

[Dr Mindbender]

Originally posted by Lefty Henry+--> (Lefty Henry)The Revolutionary Left needs to stop using all these bullshit excuses for siding with the imperialists against resistance from oppressed nations. The DPRK is a example of a country fighting imperialism, in the toughest conditions imaginable.[/b]
Yes, but theyre not defending socialism. In the DPRK, the workers have no power. It is all concentrated within the military and ruling party elite. Im not saying the west hasnt given them a tough time, Im just saying theyre not socialist either.

Originally posted by Lefty Henry+--> (Lefty Henry)
A state where dispite, sanctions, occupation, a basic embargo and no aid, admist all the crimes being perpetrated on the DPRK, it builds socialism and collectivizes agriculture, provides the masses with staple food,[/b]
Lmao :lol: provides the masses with staple food? How come the masses are dropping dead of starvation in the street while Kim Il sung and his cronies are
living like kings?

Lefty [email protected]

and fights back against the sweatshop horrors where workers are turned into slaves by imperialism as other countries
Yes, theyve avoided private slavery only to be turned into slaves by the juche state. Why is that so much better?

awayish

if you can't even convince socialists to include, well, fascists and murderers, into 'our movement,' what sort of a change do you stand against people who do not follow marx like moses
Er, :blink: we're not trying to convince 'fascists' and 'murderers' (definitely not fascists) I think you need to do some more reading.

[Dr Mindbender]

Originally posted by Dick Dastardly+--> (Dick Dastardly)Who are the Sparticans? Why would I "go to" such an ineffectual sect? What is their actual influence? Where is the "complacency" in the "broad left"?[/b]
They're an isolated branch of anti-SWP 'socialists' from the UK who support stalinist states like China and the DPRK. The only reason I mentioned them was because you asked me for an example of pro-DPRK left wingers.

Dick Dastardly

By the way, you will get a lot more attention and agreement if you use plain proletarian English, the present tense and the active voice. Your OP sounds contrived. Just a tip. Writing style is pretty important. Pick up a newspaper (journalists deal with this thing daily :P) and see how it's done.
What, so the use of 'big words' is a beourgiouse tendency? Its precisely that attitude that has stigmatised the working class for generations and kept them out of the faculties of learning. I on the other hand feel the use of vocabulary is a good thing, because it encourages and stimulates a want of fact-finding and learning. I see no reason to 'dumb down'.

[MarxSchmarx]

We have to think about what our criticism of the DPRK is meant to achieve - not just adopting a critical stance for the sake of it.

I agree. Still, the left must, AS A MATTER OF PRINCIPLE, stand for human freedom, human rights and human gain everywhere.

Kim Jong Il represents everything that is wrong with this world. He is a capitalist schmuck who would abandon his self-proclaimed "socialism" at the drop of a hat if it means he can buy himself (another) luxurious palace.

Unfortunately, too little of the world really cares about North Korea to make an issue out of it. Even in the DPRK's neighbors, token statements "denouncing" the regime suffice.

But from a propagandist standpoint, I don't think adding fuel to the fire on the DPRK will get the left very far.


The Revolutionary Left needs to stop using all these bullshit excuses for siding with the imperialists against resistance from oppressed nations. The DPRK is a example of a country fighting imperialism, in the toughest conditions imaginable.


Still, the DPRK is an imperialist state. It internally talks of a "greater Korea" withirridentist claims (http://chinaperspectives.revues.org/document806.html) on China and Russia. Moreover, it wants to impose North Korea's vision of "sovereignty" on the people of the ROK, as well as the Korean diaspora. And no matter how "tough" the fight against imperialism, that doesn't justify brutalizing your own people. Chaves, Morales and the Zapatistas "fight against imperialism" but they don't commit mass murder and incarceration.

Supporting the DPRK as against Washington or Seoul is at best like supporting Czarist Russia as against Germany in WWI. Both share repugnant social visions. Maybe criticizing the DPRK gets us nowhere. But calling them "fighters of imperialism" is a sad joke.

[Labor Shall Rule]

Originally posted by [email protected] 29, 2007 02:02 am
The Revolutionary Left needs to stop using all these bullshit excuses for siding with the imperialists against resistance from oppressed nations. The DPRK is a example of a country fighting imperialism, in the toughest conditions imaginable. A state where dispite, sanctions, occupation, a basic embargo and no aid, admist all the crimes being perpetrated on the DPRK, it builds socialism and collectivizes agriculture, provides the masses with staple food, and fights back against the sweatshop horrors where workers are turned into slaves by imperialism as other countries which have taken sharp concessions to imperialism have suffered from. The DPRK suffers in other ways, but at least it is independent and in control of itself, and a symbol that it is possible for countries to break out of this system
As was already mentioned, a ruling military and party clique that institutes factory and technical managers from the former bourgeois class is in charge in North Korea.

I hope the bastardized factory-floor and agricultural workers, the lumberjacks and miners, the soldiers and spotters, and the intellectuals and students of the country will throw off the bureaucratic yog, and substitute the repressive machinery with workers', peasants', and soldiers' councils that engage in mass action with their brothers to the south, and coordinate the overthrowing of the capitalist system within all of Korea itself.

[manic expression]

Originally posted by [email protected] 29, 2007 03:01 am
if you can't even convince socialists to include, well, fascists and murderers, into 'our movement,' what sort of a change do you stand against people who do not follow marx like moses.
What are you talking about?


The USSR only helped the non revolutionary Bourgeoisie elements of the Communist parties in Spain. Indeed the USSR only helped these various movements in Spain on the condition that they set up Liberal Bourgeoisie Capitalist Democracies! as they did not want to upset there military allies and Spains neighbour France amongst other reasons. I suggest you read George Orwells Homage To Catalonia to give yourself a better understanding of the Spanish civil war and its often confusing politics.

Not true, the only reason the Republic was able to mount an inch of resistance was because of the support given by the USSR. Without guns, you can't fight, and the USSR provided that (as well as 50,000 international volunteers, and other aids to the war effort). Sure, the Popular Front strategy was flawed, but without the USSR it would have been a much different and much uglier for Spain. And no, George Orwell is a terrible source for this subject and no serious supporter of the communist movement should ever use him as guidance is any way.

[RGacky3]

Originally posted by [email protected] 29, 2007 02:02 am
The Revolutionary Left needs to stop using all these bullshit excuses for siding with the imperialists against resistance from oppressed nations. The DPRK is a example of a country fighting imperialism, in the toughest conditions imaginable. A state where dispite, sanctions, occupation, a basic embargo and no aid, admist all the crimes being perpetrated on the DPRK, it builds socialism and collectivizes agriculture, provides the masses with staple food, and fights back against the sweatshop horrors where workers are turned into slaves by imperialism as other countries which have taken sharp concessions to imperialism have suffered from. The DPRK suffers in other ways, but at least it is independent and in control of itself, and a symbol that it is possible for countries to break out of this system
You've got to be kidding me, Personally I'd rather live in one of the United States vassel states than in the DPRK, the DPRK is one big prison, where absolute submission to the 'dear leaders' is demanded by threat of death and the 'dear leaders' are worshiped, where people outside the cities starve to uphold the military dicatorship and the ruling class, and where those in the cities live in constant fear of being thrown in a concentration camp, and have no freedom of speach. Its not independent, its under Kims Control, and Kim is a major asshole, I'd rather be under Capitalist control than Kims personally. Which is why people risk their lives all the time to get to south Korea or China.

[Ismail]

Originally posted by [email protected] 02, 2007 03:26 pm
I'd rather be under Capitalist control than Kims personally. Which is why people risk their lives all the time to get to south Korea or China.
Do you take a similar view of the USSR (under Stalin), Albania, Vietnam (under Hó Chi Minh), China (under Mao), etc?

[manic expression]

Originally posted by [email protected] 02, 2007 08:26 pm
You've got to be kidding me, Personally I'd rather live in one of the United States vassel states than in the DPRK, the DPRK is one big prison, where absolute submission to the 'dear leaders' is demanded by threat of death and the 'dear leaders' are worshiped, where people outside the cities starve to uphold the military dicatorship and the ruling class, and where those in the cities live in constant fear of being thrown in a concentration camp, and have no freedom of speach. Its not independent, its under Kims Control, and Kim is a major asshole, I'd rather be under Capitalist control than Kims personally. Which is why people risk their lives all the time to get to south Korea or China.
As has been said throughout this thread, North Korea isn't the baby-eating-fire-and-brimstone-dungeon the west makes it out to be (you know, it IS legal to laugh above the 38th parallel). On the contrary, it was outperforming South Korea up to the 1970's, with very respectable standards of living and services. That's changed due to many reasons, but we need to bear in mind that most of what we hear about North Korea is suspect.

Furthermore, North Korea needs to be defended from capitalist aggression, period. The capitalists are trying to demonize and break the DPRK, and we should not stand by idly. Do I disagree with many of the policies of the DPRK? Of course! However, that, IMO, is secondary.

[RGacky3]

On the contrary, it was outperforming South Korea up to the 1970's, with very respectable standards of living and services. That's changed due to many reasons, but we need to bear in mind that most of what we hear about North Korea is suspect.


I was'nt at all talking about economic production, I was talking about the totalitarian regime and the absolute lack of any freedoms and the diefying of the Kim Jun Ill.


Furthermore, North Korea needs to be defended from capitalist aggression, period. The capitalists are trying to demonize and break the DPRK, and we should not stand by idly. Do I disagree with many of the policies of the DPRK? Of course! However, that, IMO, is secondary.

No its not, North Korea has to be defended from Capitalist aggression, but the bigest threat right now, to North Korea (the people) is the government, infact its not a threat, its oppressing them right now.


Do you take a similar view of the USSR (under Stalin), Albania, Vietnam (under Hó Chi Minh), China (under Mao), etc?

Considering under stalin and Mao, theres a big chance I'd be dead or in prison ,yeah.

[OneBrickOneVoice]

Yes, but theyre not defending socialism. In the DPRK, the workers have no power. It is all concentrated within the military and ruling party elite. Im not saying the west hasnt given them a tough time, Im just saying theyre not socialist either.

yes they are. North Korea is still in the process of building socialism, and there are lots of bureacratic problems, but the fact is that the people are in control and imperialism has been kicked out. The Korean people are in control of the North. Organs of people's control in North Korea are the People's Committees formed during WWII as well as the Supreme Assembly. But what's more important is the fact that healthcare is universal along with education, that city planning is not oreintated towards kicking out the working class through gentrification but to serving their needs, like for example, health facilities being built right near factories. why? Because they are in control.


Lmao :lol: provides the masses with staple food? How come the masses are dropping dead of starvation in the street while Kim Il sung and his cronies are
living like kings?

ummm Kim Il Sung died over 10 years ago. And yeah North Korea is going through tough economic conditions but that's because there is a essential blockade against it. That said the people aren't starving now. Conditions in alot of oppressed nations are far worse then the media attempts to portray North Korea, and there are some that are better, but the fact is that under the immense pressure from imperialism, people are in control and the system tries to garuntee them their social rights and serve them unlike other countries in which the masses suffer as a result of imperialism and don't have access to the type of healthcare, education, and other basic socialist rights people in the DPRK have.



Yes, theyve avoided private slavery only to be turned into slaves by the juche state. Why is that so much better?

Sorry but that's fucking upsurd

[Dr Mindbender]

Originally posted by LeftyHenry+October 07, 2007 02:46 am--> (LeftyHenry @ October 07, 2007 02:46 am)
yes they are. North Korea is still in the process of building socialism, and there are lots of bureacratic problems, but the fact is that the people are in control and imperialism has been kicked out. The Korean people are in control of the North. Organs of people's control in North Korea are the People's Committees formed during WWII as well as the Supreme Assembly. But what's more important is the fact that healthcare is universal along with education, that city planning is not oreintated towards kicking out the working class through gentrification but to serving their needs, like for example, health facilities being built right near factories. why? Because they are in control.

ummm Kim Il Sung died over 10 years ago. And yeah North Korea is going through tough economic conditions but that's because there is a essential blockade against it. That said the people aren't starving now. Conditions in alot of oppressed nations are far worse then the media attempts to portray North Korea, and there are some that are better, but the fact is that under the immense pressure from imperialism, people are in control and the system tries to garuntee them their social rights and serve them unlike other countries in which the masses suffer as a result of imperialism and don't have access to the type of healthcare, education, and other basic socialist rights people in the DPRK have.


Sorry but that's fucking upsurd [/b]


Originally posted by [email protected]

Multiple international human rights organizations, including Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, accuse North Korea of having one of the worst human rights records of any nation.[14] North Koreans have been referred to as "some of the world's most brutalized people", regarding their severe restrictions on political and economic freedoms.[15] North Korean defectors have testified to the existence of prison and detention camps with an estimated 150,000 to 200,000 inmates, and have reported torture, starvation, rape, murder, medical experimentation, forced labor, and forced abortions.[16]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Korea#G...nt_and_politics (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Korea#Government_and_politics)

Plus, if what you saying is true, about North koreans enjoying better standards than capitalist countries and all, why is there the need for the DPRK army to patrol the northern border with snipers to shoot anyone escaping? By your logic this should be not needed.

lefty henry

ummm Kim Il Sung died over 10 years ago.
Yeah, i meant the other one, 'dear leader'.

[Lynx]

Is the DPRK an independent country or a Chinese proxy? I mean, they appear to be very dependent on trade and links with China

[Dr Mindbender]

Originally posted by [email protected] 07, 2007 09:25 pm
Is the DPRK an independent country or a Chinese proxy? I mean, they appear to be very dependent on trade and links with China
I think its safe to say that without china's help its people would have eaten each other a long time ago.

[MarxSchmarx]

I think its safe to say that without china's help its people would have eaten each other a long time ago.

Sadly, it doesn't seem to have done much good preventing cannibalism:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml...6/08/wkor08.xml (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2003/06/08/wkor08.xml)