North Korean Tourism -- A Trip To Kimland

[SirTweek]

I'd hate to see your definition of democracy, ned.

[Odd]

Originally posted by SirTweek




This is such an inane statement I'm just lost for words.

Sorry if I didn´t made myself clear... that was supposed to be a joke.

[Nubclear]

Originally posted by Ned
Kim and Saddam are both socialists, at least according to them. You say they are not socialists, but Stalinists. Somehow, this makes them not socialist?

Argh, Sirtweak beat me to it.....

[Nubclear]

Originally posted by Ned
SirTweak, of course they are democracies. The only problem as with all socialist countries, there is only one party on the ballot.

Yeah, and their people always speak out against the government. And I bet they travel to the US quite often. In fact, I hear North Korean immigrants coming here (legally, of course) is quite high, isn't it? No ned, it isnt a democracy. At best, its a totalitarian democracy, and at worst its an authoritarian state.

Also Sava: Scandanavia, perhaps?

[Q Classic]

Getting back on topic, does SK broadcast TV or radio into the North. The people seem to have no real idea what is going on outside NK. I think a major reason for the "collapse" of socialst Europe was the Voice of America and other avenues of information that let the people know that their socialist rulers were lying to them.

Kinda hard to listen to anything like the voice of america when power goes out in the countryside at night (it's kinda pretty/strange it a wierd way, when you look at a picture from space of east asia at night~ japan and skorea are lit up like christmas trees, china is fairly bright, and north korea is... black...), when people report each other, when tv is scarce out of the city, and the city is controlled mainly by loyalists.

incidentally, didn't a lot of those communist/stalinist regimes fall after pope jp2 visited them?

kim's rhetoric calls it a democratic and socialist state. rhetoric is quite different from action, and i highly doubt one could call nkorea democratic (yes, 1 party, people vote... but apparently, if you don't vote, you don't count, as evidenced by the frequent 100% voter turn outs in nkorea...), nor socialist (socialism has much to do with people owning everything, not an oppresive state military machine under one man...)

[Odd]

Originally posted by Q Cubed



incidentally, didn't a lot of those communist/stalinist regimes fall after pope jp2 visited them?

Probably because a totalitarian atheist regime would only accept a visit from the pope if it was not very well in holding itself together.

[Dinner]

Sava: China, NK, & Cuba are all communist countries. Please notice that authoritarianism is a common characteristic of communist government and not the other way around.

Ned: One can be socialist and democratic; examples are Sweden, France, & many more in Europe. You are confusing Communism with socialism and the two are fundementally different. Socialism says all major sources of production should be state owned while communism says that all means of production should be state owned. Thus the French government owning large companies such as Renault qualify them as being socialist but NK's government owns all land and all industry so they are communist.

[ranskaldan]

Oerdin:

China is not communist anymore, except in name. I would hardly call a country with 50-60% of the GDP in the growing private sector "communist".

And as I said, North Korea is a nuisance and a threat to modern China. It threatens China's trade interests; it blocks links to South Korean ports; it spews refugees into China at an alarming rate; and it is becoming a mightily huge, embarassing, unpredictable time bomb. In short, everything NK has done after the time we saved their a$$es in the 50's has been against Chinese national interest. To say that China "supports" North Korea's insane, suicidal policies is ridiculous.

At least the Bush administration knows who their friends are in dealing with North Korea.

[Dinner]

Ranskaldan: China is attempting to convert itself from a communist to a Socialist system but I would still quify it as a communist power given its history and the fact the 40%-50% of the econmy is directly owned and controlled by the state. Not just major production sources like your average socialist state owns, no, the PRC still has its hands very much in the minutia of daily life.

The may very well make the transition but it is still some years in the future.

[ranskaldan]

The transition is well past the halfway mark.

Originally posted by Oerdin
Ranskaldan: China is attempting to convert itself from a communist to a Socialist system but I would still quify it as a communist power given its history...

By that standard, the USSR still exists.

and the fact the 40%-50% of the econmy is directly owned and controlled by the state.

And the remaining 50%-60% is privately owned.
That makes a mixed economy, a socialist and not communist system. Economically speaking, China isn't far off from Canada or Scandinavia.

Not just major production sources like your average socialist state owns, no, the PRC still has its hands very much in the minutia of daily life.

That characterizes a dictatorship. Even South Korea twenty years ago was a dictatorship, and not too different from China today. (or Singapore today, for that matter.)

[Ned]

Originally posted by Oerdin
Sava: China, NK, & Cuba are all communist countries. Please notice that authoritarianism is a common characteristic of communist government and not the other way around.

Ned: One can be socialist and democratic; examples are Sweden, France, & many more in Europe. You are confusing Communism with socialism and the two are fundementally different. Socialism says all major sources of production should be state owned while communism says that all means of production should be state owned. Thus the French government owning large companies such as Renault qualify them as being socialist but NK's government owns all land and all industry so they are communist.

Communism is a form of socialism. Socialism is the genus, communism is a species.

State control of the means of production leads to authoritarian governments. Kim and Saddam are not aberations.

One can have mixed state ownership and capitalism, such as we see in France. However, so long as capitism survives, the state is not a socialist state. Where it no longer survives, we get Stalin, Mao, and the two Kims. Evil butchers all.

The people of NK will rise up against their oppressors if they know that the state is lying to them. Information is the key to liberation.

[Kontiki]

As a point of fact, Canada is only "socialist" relative to the US. The only state ownership of any significance in our country are a couple of utilities (many of these have actually been privitized) and the post office, plus we have socialized medicare. Just about every western European country is more socialist than Canada.

[cinch]

As a point of fact, Canada is only "socialist" relative to the US. The only state ownership of any significance in our country are a couple of utilities (many of these have actually been privitized) and the post office, plus we have socialized medicare. Just about every western European country is more socialist than Canada.

I was just about to say this.

Since the general trend of national economics has been to the right as of late (despite Kyoto and all), Canada has probably moved to the right of centre on the grand spectrum. We're not very socialist at all, actually...

Heck, we don't even have free university!

Lucky Swedes...

[Shi Huangdi]

Originally posted by Sava
Neddy, Neddy, Neddy...

China and North Korea are Authoritarian states... not socialist, not communist. The closest thing to a Socialist state is Canada. Last time I checked, Canada wasn't a brutal dictatorship run by an evil regime.

I never hesitate to bring up one of my favorite quotes in a situation like this:
"Don't piss on my boots an tell me it's raining."

Well Neddy... China and North Korea are pissing on your boots, and you think its raining.

Shutup. You have no idea what you are talking about WRT what is and isn't socialist. Or if you think you do, feel free to ressurect the thread we "debated" this originally- although it was more like me making my argument and you BAMing. IIRC even Chegitz, the resident expert on Socialism, agreed with me.

[Arrian]

Originally posted by Q Cubed
seeing this makes me kinda sad.

this is another wonderfully-written article by a korean-american.
a visit to north korea

besides, monk, you do realize most of the people they talked to are brainwashed victims, no?

once they get a taste of freedom, capitalism, luxury... i'm quite sure they'd come around.

that's not to say unification will be easy. it won't. but.

Q Cubed,

I read the article you linked to a few weeks back, and found it very interesting. I LOVED the part about how Gone With the Wind was their favorite movie.

TMM,

Thanks for the one you posted. The pictures really added something.

Both of them strike me as so sad. It really is right out of 1984.

-Arrian