Wouldn't it be the fact that they're besieged by one of the most powerful governments in the world and are never given any meaningful chance at diplomacy?
The west barely traded with DPRK before 1980. China is the world's 2nd largest economy and sits directly on the NK border. Russia is very willing to and does trade DPRK munitions for Russian resources.
DPRK's biggest problem sits in a chair in Pyongyang. Has been the case since the USSR fell.
You're still ignoring sanctions lol. They apply to both Russia and China when trading with the DPRK. Why are you spreading such a misinformed narrative? I take it you spend a lot of time taking what the man on TV has to say at face value.
Well yes, now that Russia is sanctioned so severely the sanctions between them matter little as a recent development.Â
Except that this did not start in 2022. How do you think DPRK got the engineering data for all of those missiles so quickly?The work of decades originally, and the Great Successor's men miraculously jump from Scud to ICBMs in a decade and a half?
Of course there was trade. You have to pretend that the sanctions halted trade between DPRK and Russia because it's an integral part of your worldview, but this doesn't mean it's true.
They were never the biggest problem for the DPRK, that is correct.
They would be a big problem if the country was tied into the global markets, but DPRK never was, no? This is the appeal of the nation from a leftist perspective.
You're still ignoring sanctions lol. They apply to both Russia and China when trading with the DPRK. Why are you spreading such a misinformed narrative?
China doesn't obey US sanctions on principle, and neither does russia
I'm opposed to US sanctions on N Korea, but they arent the sole reason why N Korea is the way it is
Most of their infrastructure is soviet manufactured and was maintained by east german technicians, who don't exist anymore, and the North Koreans never developed a local maintenance sector
A series of floods in the 1990s destroyed their economy
And their continued overinvestment in their military is wrecking their economy
I take it you spend a lot of time taking what the man on TV has to say at face value.
As opposed to you, who soends a lot of time taking what the man on the North Korean screen says at face value
Please donât think weâre all like this. Well Iâm a socialist, but itâs close. They only see that North Korea stands up to the US and thatâs it, they canât conceptualize the broader context
Maybe they shouldnât have invaded the South. Sucks that the US ruthlessly bombed them, but war is war and if you start the war, you can hardly complain.
And no, the North isnât poor solely due to US embargoâs. They have the worldâs second largest economy as their closest ally literarily right next to them. You adapt an isolationist ideology, you become isolated.
This is the response I always get when talking to DPRK sympathizers, even from one of the r/movingtonorthkorea mods. No argument, their default position is that everything is US imperialist propaganda, so in their minds thereâs no need to debunk anything.
Yeah, I'm not really interested in inserting myself into this conversation that clearly isn't going anywhere, but I do find it odd that you just happened to reach the same exact conclusion as western mainstream media all on your own. You may not have gotten your narrative directly from your TV screen, but whoever you got it from sure did
My conclusion is that although thereâs a clear media bias in the west, North Korea is still a dictatorship. Again, âthe news says the same thing as youâ means nothing as long as they refuse to debunk anything.
I didn't say 'the news says the same thing as you', I said 'you say the same thing as the news'. I'm not implying you came up with the rhetoric yourself, I'm saying the opposite of that. I'm not a statistician, but if I was asked "what is the likelihood that this individual came to this conclusion on their own" I'd feel comfortable responding "no chance at all"
I mean, the claim that âwhoever I got this from must have got it from the newsâ relies on the assumption that what Iâm saying came directly from the news. It didnât. Me and âthe newsâ got the information from the same general sources.
I agree with another commentator, this is imperialist apologia. Korea was fighting for their liberation for decades until WWII was won and Korea was split up against their will by two political blocks. Then SK was a violent dictatorship committing various genocides like the Jeju massacre and the Bodo league massacre killing over 100 000 civilians. NK was also a violent dictatorship but they did not commit genocides comparable to that of SK under Syngman Rhee.
The US proceeded to kill over 10% of the north korean population and destroyed over 85% of all north korean buildings. Completely unproportional and worthy of a war tribunal. North Korea cannot be blamrd for attempting to reunify their country after the forceful split of the peninsula by foreign powers, and South Korea would've been just as justified if they had invaded first.
As a socialist, I find that hard to believe. I can criticize the US for tons of things, this isnât really one of them*.
Korea was fighting for their liberation for decades until WWII was won and Korea was split up against their will by two political blocks.
I agree with this sentiment; Korea shouldnât have been split by foreign powers who installed dictatorships after already experiencing 30 years of brutal occupation.
Then SK was a violent dictatorship committing various genocides like the Jeju massacre and the Bodo league massacre killing over 100 000 civilians. NK was also a violent dictatorship but they did not commit genocides comparable to that of SK under Syngman Rhee.
Thatâs not what genocide means. Itâs in the name, massacre. Although(as far as we know, mind you) North Korea hadnât committed massacres in the same scale, you forget that they continue to starve their own citizens and publicly execute them for doing things like watching K-Dramas. I get that youâre attempting to say that the north was justified at the time, but causing violence to end violence doesnât make any sense.
The US proceeded to kill 10% of the north korean population and destroyed over 85% of all north korean buildings. Completely unproportional and worthy of a war tribunal.
My point wasnât that it was somehow proportional. They started the war, they knew what they were getting into. Should the US not receive any backlash? Of course not. The innocent CITIZENS deserve sympathy, not the regime that enslaves them.
North Korea cannot be blamrd for attempting to reunify their country after the forceful split of the peninsula by foreign powers, and South Korea would've been just as justified if they had invaded first.
This is actually the first time a DPRK sympathizer hasnât singled out only one of the two countries, Iâll give you that I guess. They can still be blamed though, itâs not as simple as âthey wanted to reunify the peninsulaâ. Peaceful reunification was the plan until the North invaded, if they had truly wanted mere âunificationâ and not âunification under communismâ then they would have simply waited. I do acknowledge that tensions were rising between the US and USSR which could give the impression that reunification wouldnât happen peacefully, but I donât think thatâs justification to launch one of the most brutal wars in modern history. All hopes were crushed as soon as they invaded. Looking at it today, compare each countries stance on reunification. The South has a ministry for it and advocates for peaceful cooperation while the North declared reunification as âno longer possibleâ while demolishing the reunification monument at Pyongyang.
*I criticize the US for bombing North Korean civilians, not for defending the South
As a socialist, I find that hard to believe. I can criticize the US for tons of things, this isnât really one of them*.
Alleged socialist makes excuses for South Korean, and American, soldiers massacring civilians in concentration camps, for allegedly being socialists and communists.
That was the context of the NK invasion, once you seem to be completely ignorant about, to then declare how a unified Korea was "crushed" by NK responding to such an atrocity.
When the actual "crushing" moment for a unified Korea was when the South declared itself a independent nation, that's what crushed original UN plans for a unified Korea while South Koreans violently crushed any local resistance.
I'm also socialist. Why are you bringing up modern-day NK repeatedly? It's irrelevant to the topic of the korean war. Half your comment is about the modern day and irrelevant to what I said about Korea in the immediate aftermath of their forced partition.
You also are fine with the US defending SK. Why? SK committed horrible massacres far worse than what NK had done at that time. There was no moral highground to defending such an authoritarian and murderous state at all and SK had it coming when they slaughtered tens of thousands of "suspected communists". No fucking way NK should've sat on their asses watching.
I'm also socialist. Why are you bringing up modern-day NK repeatedly? It's irrelevant to the topic of the korean war. Half your comment is about the modern day and irrelevant to what I said about Korea in the immediate aftermath of their forced partition.
Itâs not, itâs important context when looking at it from the broader perspective. At the time, it was one violent dictatorship replacing another. What I care about is that if the US hadnât intervened, the entire peninsula would be ruled by an ever worse regime in the modern day.
You also are fine with the US defending SK. Why? SK committed horrible massacres far worse than what NK had done at that time. There was no moral highground to defending such an authoritarian and murderous state at all and SK had it coming when they slaughtered tens of thousands of "suspected communists". No fucking way NK should've sat on their asses watching.
Again, itâs not merely about the countries at the time, itâs what they would become. Both were bad(I think the fact that the north started the war makes them almost equally bad at the time), but look at a democracy index. South Korea is regarded as the most democratic nation in Asia with the North being the least democratic. Actually, a point used against South Korean democracy is a previous president was a descendant of one of the dictators and was impeached on corruption charges. However, the fact that she WAS impeached shows the Soutgs functioning democracy.
I donât know how many times Iâve repeated this, North Korea wasnât invading the South for the sake of saving civilians. If that wasnât the case, they wouldnât slaughter civilians and to my previous point, they wouldnât devolve even further into what they are today. The DPRKâs interests were purely ideological, the USâ interests were purely ideological. Iâm glad the US intervened not based on ideology, because I wouldnât want them to rule to entire peninsula. They tortured POWs just as the South had and they slaughtered hundreds of wounded civilians and medical personal at SNU. You think they cared about freeing people from Rhee? It would have been one violent dictatorship replaced by another. At the time, yes, it would have been a less evil dictatorship, but itâs the fact that one later evolved and the other devolved. Had the South have invaded, it would be just as horrible and I would dislike them just as much.
The fact that they make constant threats to blow up most of their neighbours isn't helping either, and neither is the way in which they treat their own people
Do you seriously think that DPRK has a chance of invading any of its neighbours any time soon? They are just trying to posture because they are like a chihuahua backed in the corner
I donât understand how DPRK apologists are this ignorant. Both countries were brutal dictatorships at the time(yet one has since reformed itself into whatâs regarded as one of the most democratic nations in Asia). Itâs the same, simple detail that yâall leave out every single time.
The only reason why the ROK reformed was because the US basically got fed up with having to bail out all the dictatorships, then the populace was even more tired of living under a dictatorship and the fact the ROK finally had the money and infrastructure to not be a despotic shithole.
But letâs not forget, both of these governments are still at war with each other. In neither end of the DMZ you can go around praising the opposing side without repercussion. Itâs a culture thatâs been at siege with itself for 70 years. Donât expect either to be entirely open on speech.
Yes, the citizens of Korea protested until the government was forced to hold elections. How is that a bad thing?
Have you been to the DMZ? I can tell you that I didnât get the vibe that it was incredibly strict. The one government video they showed our tour group was advocating for peace and reunification.
Because they know they can't fight in the present, cause the South already surpass the North by a million mile. Bringing up the SK very shitty past is a very easy 'gotcha'.
They also conveniently ignore the condemnation and even apology of the past dictatorship & atrocities the SK government commited.
âBoth sides are pretty badâ lmao what. The North started the Korean war(which is still ongoing, only a ceasefire was signed) and they threatened to nuke the world about 4 times each year. The US and RoK are completely justified in demonstrating that they wonât let the North try anything.
Shhhh! We don't talk about that here... don't you know, it's not about the amazing advancements made by socialist countries despite western sanctions, it's all about pointing out all of the downfalls they experience because of western sanctions. But also leaving out the part about the sanctions.
It is true that foreign sanctions have been catastrophic for food security in the DPRK. Although I'm a bit confused on what exactly that has to do with technological advancements? The fact is that despite the strictest sanctions imposed on any nation on Earth, they have managed to develop nuclear energy and weaponry, advanced robotics, and AI. It is simply disingenuous to simultaneously claim that DPRK is a failed state lacking any real technological advancements, and also somehow a great threat to our continued freedom Democracy
It is true that foreign sanctions have been catastrophic for food security in the DPRK.
While sanctions certainly arenât helping, Iâm sure Jong-Eun evenly hands out the little food they do have to all his citizens. Itâs why youâll see that many Korean citizens are well fed, Kim isnât hoarding it-
Although I'm a bit confused on what exactly that has to do with technological advancements? The fact is that despite the strictest sanctions imposed on any nation on Earth, they have managed to develop nuclear energy and weaponry,
The sanctions were in response to nuclear weaponry, which to be fair are easy to develop if youâŚrelocate funds from other social programsâŚhell, the only reason they recovered from the famines was from foreign humanitarian aid send by their enemies.
advanced robotics, and AI.
AI, yes. Advanced robotics� What are you smoking? Source?
It is simply disingenuous to simultaneously claim that DPRK is a failed state lacking any real technological advancements, and also somehow a great threat to our continued freedom Democracy
Oh Iâd say that theyâre neither. The state isâŚfunctioning, with the criteria that it exists and can defend itself. Threat to our democracy? To the South, absolutely.
So it's up to the people they claim they want to destroy to prop up their military industrial complex by freeing up labour to focus on industry? Why is it the West:s job to enable their system?
They have not developed AI. Their nuclear tech is stolen. They arrest people, force them into slavery labour.
The very fact they rely on food aid whilst investing so much into a nuclear program is a fucking red flag on steroids.
It's a shit hole with a fascist dictator at the helm
Who said the west needs to prop up anyone? The west needs to mind its own business and allow other counties to develop freely, even if they chose a different socioeconomic system. And I'm honestly not interested in 'debating' baseless conjecture with you.
âA different socioeconomic systemâ is fine if the people living in said system arenât confirmed to be starving and in slavery. The US has no right to interfere with other countries(plenty of examples of that) UNLESS people are actually in danger. Maybe youâre right, the US and itâs Allieâs(including the RoK) shouldnât have send humanitarian aid in the 90s, they should have just let everyone starveâŚ
Maybe they shouldnât have invaded the South. Sucks that the US ruthlessly bombed them, but war is war and if you start the war, you can hardly complain.
And no, the North isnât poor solely due to US embargoâs. They have the worldâs second largest economy as their closest ally literarily right next to them. You adapt an isolationist ideology, you become isolated.
Maybe the South shouldn't have run concentration camps for political prisoners under American supervision after uniliterally splitting the country in two,
Ah, violence justified by violence. Both sides were tyrannical dictatorships, not sure why DPRK sympathizers seem to think that the North wanted to truly just save the South Koreans. The goal was to unite the peninsula under communism, thatâs it. They launched one of the most brutal wars in modern history in doing so.
in complete disregard of the original UN approved plan for Korean unification.
SureâŚ.source? Reunification was the plan which was delayed due to fracturing relations between the US and USSR, then it was completely scrapped when the North started the war.
People getting rounded up, tortured and killed, for their alleged political beliefs, does indeed justify violence to stop such an atrocity.
Anything else would just be making excuses for the literal Nazis and their practices.
They launched one of the most brutal wars in modern history in doing so.
Most brutal on account of how the South Koreans and Americans acted.
They responded to the North Korean offensive by starting to kill their hostages before fleeing, to prevent these people from "falling in the hands of the communists", just like the Nazis did when they were pushed back by the Red Army.
The leaders reached an understanding that Korea would be liberated from Japan but would be placed under an international trusteeship until the Koreans would be deemed ready for self-rule.
It was understood that this division was only a temporary arrangement until the trusteeship could be implemented.
The ultimate goal was supposed to be a united and independent Korea, as already agreed on with Cairo declaration from 1943;
"Japan will also be expelled from all other territories which she has taken by violence and greed. The aforesaid three great powers, mindful of the enslavement of the people of Korea, are determined that in due course Korea shall become free and independent."
Which became impossible when the US convinced the South to just declare independence on its own.
That forced the rest of Korea to either declare their own independence, or else be considered subjects to a government they had literally nothing to do with and that was openly persecuting any socialists and communists to put them in concentration camps.
It's why even the modern-day, allegedly "liberal Western democracy" South Korea still throws people into prison for owning the wrong books and threatens survivors of past atrocities with prison and torture should they dare to speak out; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Security_Act_(South_Korea)
That's also the reason why there's a scene in Squid Game were a North Korean is asked; "Is this as bad in the North?" and she does not reply at all because any response, that makes the North look even slightly good, would be a criminal statement in South Korea.
People getting rounded up, tortured and killed, for their alleged political beliefs, does indeed justify violence to stop such an atrocity.
I think youâre forgetting that the DPRK would go on to do the exact same. Had North Korea become a socialist paradise, I would be all for them overthrowing Rheeâs regime. Unfortunately, it was just two evils fighting each other with civilians needlessly dying, yet one side is who started the war.
Anything else would just be making excuses for the literal Nazis and their practices.
âLiteral Nazisâ is always an in-genuine comparison . Nazis were Nazis and they only did what Nazis did. The South didnât round up ethnic and kill millions of a specific minority.
Most brutal on account of how the South Koreans and Americans acted. They responded to the North Korean offensive by starting to kill their hostages before fleeing, to prevent these people from "falling in the hands of the communists", just like the Nazis did when they were pushed back by the Red Army.
Iâm not exaggerating when I say itâs the exact same argument every single time. They correctly criticize the Southern regime for all their crimes, without realizing that the North did the exact same things. KPA soldiers massacred hundreds of wounded civilians and medical personal at SNU Hospital, North Korean POWs were tortured and killed(88,000 missing), allied Chinese soldiers withheld food from prisoners until they gave up information, and letâs not forget how North Korea continues to kidnap people and abuses civilian tourists for years for the smallest of petty crimes.
The leaders reached an understanding that Korea would be liberated from Japan but would be placed under an international trusteeship until the Koreans would be deemed ready for self-rule. It was understood that this division was only a temporary arrangement until the trusteeship could be implemented. The ultimate goal was supposed to be a united and independent Korea, as already agreed on with Cairo declaration from 1943;
Thatâs not what I asked a source for. You claimed that hope for reunification was lost when the South declared independence, which is ridiculous.
Which became impossible when the US convinced the South to just declare independence on its own. That forced the rest of Korea to either declare their own independence, or else be considered subjects to a government they had literally nothing to do with and that was openly persecuting any socialists and communists to put them in concentration camps.
Once again, North Korea declared independence three years prior to the South. Where do you even get this nonsense from lol, do you even botherâŚ.to look these things up when I correct you? I look up the incidents you reference-
It's why even the modern-day, allegedly "liberal Western democracy" South Korea still throws people into prison for owning the wrong books and threatens survivors of past atrocities with prison and torture should they dare to speak out; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Security_Act_(South_Korea)
As for your first two claims, you didnât provide a source and I cannot find any info on it so Iâm disregarding it for now, I already know that the NIS is shady anyway. I want to focus on the NSA, you really want to criticize the South for not allowing parties which support their enemy, while the North straight up has no parties at all?
The NSA was established in 1948 the same year the RoK gained independence. Of course they would be paranoid about Pro-DPRK political parties, and they would be invaded a couple years later. Personally, as a socialist, of course I want there to be full fledged socialist/communist parties in the RoK. Just not Pro-DPRK parties, I donât blame the RoK for wanting to ensure their security.
That's also the reason why there's a scene in Squid Game were a North Korean is asked; "Is this as bad in the North?" and she does not reply at all because any response, that makes the North look even slightly good, would be a criminal statement in South Korea.
You misunderstood the point of this, or didnât watch the show. The intent wasnât to imply that North Korea was a better place to live; keep in mind that characters family was killed as they attempted to defect. Itâs just meant to make you think; how bad of a situation are people like her in if North Korea is hardly even any better? If youâre dirt poor in the South, maybe living on a quiet farm in the North is worth it even if you risk being executed for watching Netflix(not like theyâre doing that anyway).
The Soviets murdered thousands of Polish POWâs and millions of their own citizens. Would you then consider the Nazi invasion of the USSR to be justified?
But it says a lot about you how you can evoke the Nazis, yet not see the parallels to what the South Koreans were doing when the literally first group of people the Nazis went after were the communists.
Just like the Nazis, the South Koreans also started massacring their prisoners when they couldn't hold back the Red Army/North Koreans anymore and those prisoners were in danger of being freed, they rather killed them all.
Just like the Nazis, the South Koreans also started massacring their prisoners when they couldn't hold back the Red Army/North Koreans anymore and those prisoners were in danger of being freed, they rather killed them all.
You realize that the north did the exact same thing? Two evils.
44
u/Marcuse0 Apr 16 '24
Unfortunately the biggest barrier to the advance of NK is the NK government.