[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / animu / fascist / fast / general / hisrol / tacos / vg / vichan ]

/marx/ - Marxism

It makes you smart
Winner of the 53rd Attention-Hungry Games
/d/ - egenerates

August 2018 - 8chan Transparency Report
Name
Email
Subject
Comment *
File
Password (Randomized for file and post deletion; you may also set your own.)
* = required field[▶ Show post options & limits]
Confused? See the FAQ.
Embed
(replaces files and can be used instead)
Options

Allowed file types:jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webm, mp4, swf, pdf
Max filesize is 16 MB.
Max image dimensions are 15000 x 15000.
You may upload 5 per post.


File: b6a4dbfe6b00fa3⋯.png (36.63 KB, 1265x632, 1265:632, north_korea_flag_by_marios….png)

 No.5141

hello Marx, I tried to find out what is going on in DPRK, I know most of the media showing about is 10/10 fake propaganda, but what happened there? how is the situations?

I mean

>it still socialist state?

>the party there still marxist-leninst one?

>what is """juche""" - """self reliance""" and can we consider it as a development for the Marxist-leninist ideology?

thanks /marx/

 No.5143

File: ac4e9479afde2db⋯.jpg (63.32 KB, 625x401, 625:401, kim-jong-il-teaching-class….jpg)

To answer your questions:

Yes.

The WPK claims that Juche has superseded Marxism-Leninism, so you won't see the latter term much used in the country, but they clearly still use ML concepts. Check out Kim Jong Un's report to the 2016 Party Congress: http://www.ncnk.org/resources/news-items/kim-jong-uns-speeches-and-public-statements-1/KJU_Speeches_7th_Congress.pdf

As for your last question, there's a Pyongyang-published work: https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B8E-ucthI07ic19CbUxuVDRmSEU/view

To quote from it:

>The Juche idea is, in a word, an ideology that the masses of the people are the master of the revolution and construction and they have the strength to push them. In other words, it is an ideology that man is the master of his destiny and he has the power to carve out his destiny.

And:

>To carry out the principle of maintaining self-reliance in national defence means to defend the country with one's own efforts. In other words, it means that each country has to build the strong military power with which to defend the country with its own efforts and solve all the problems arising in the construction of national defence and military activities in line with the interests of the people and the actual conditions of the country. . .

>Self-reliance in national defence is a military guarantee for the country's political independence and economic self-support. Only when a country adheres to the self-reliant principle in national defence can it repulse imperialist aggression and intervention, achieve political independence and economic self-support and defend the social system and the people's safety.

As a note, here's a good read on the DPRK: http://bookzz.org/book/2544545/008a54


 No.5144

File: f4aa66d80faa8f1⋯.jpg (145.99 KB, 700x525, 4:3, x013.jpg)

>>5143

thanks so much for these plenty info; comrade isma'iel.

I am really appreciating your efforts!


 No.5168

>it still socialist state?

No. If there ever was a degenerated worker's state, it is the dprk. Idiotic propaganda aside, it is a fact that people outiside the capital tend to live in shity conditions, with malnutrition being present in many children. On the other hand, things are much better in Pyongyang where most people are affeliated with the party. The higher up the hierarchy someone is, the more luxuries they can afford. For example, only party officials own cars.

>the party there still marxist-leninst one?

No, juche can no longer be considered even a revisionism of marxism, even they themselves admit that. The main tennet of the juche ideology is what they call the "Leader", who is a personification of the will of the people. It's actually a lot closer to feudalism, in the sense that the "Leader" is presented as the personification of some abstract perfect Other and the position is of course hereditary. This mirrors the feudalistic concept of the hereditary monarch who is also the personification of the perfect Other, the difference being that the Other in feudalism is the divine while the Other juche is the marxist historical dialectic of class struggle.

In a sense, their ideology is a perversion of marxist dialectic that serves as justification for a hereditary monarchy

>what is """juche""" - """self reliance""" and can we consider it as a development for the Marxist-leninist ideology?

Not by a long shot. You should read some of their own official literature, and you'll realize that what I said above holds true. Also, there is a very strong nationalistic sentiment in their ideology, even bordering a caste system, moetly against people with japanese ancestry


 No.5173

File: d26be5684b8e76b⋯.jpg (195.7 KB, 884x589, 884:589, kim il sung liberation war.jpg)

>>5168

>it is a fact that people outiside the capital tend to live in shity conditions, with malnutrition being present in many children. On the other hand, things are much better in Pyongyang where most people are affeliated with the party.

If this is your criteria for a workers' state, then the USSR and China were never workers' states. Living conditions in Moscow and Leningrad, or Beijing and Shanghai, were vastly superior to rural areas.

It isn't surprising that the capital of a country is going to be materially better off than the rest of it, and also being the center of the government and other parts of society (organizations, the armed forces, etc.) it isn't surprising that "most people are affiliated with the party."

It's also worth noting that the DPRK is still to this day overcoming the disaster the collapse of the USSR brought on its agriculture, combined with flooding that led to famine conditions in the 90s. Western sanctions have not helped it, nor has having to spend a large amount of its budget on military and nuclear deterrents.

>even bordering a caste system

The whole "caste system" stuff is spurious, see: http://www.rhizzone.net/article/2016/05/28/songbullshit/


 No.5174

>>5173

>If this is your criteria for a workers' state, then the USSR and China were never workers' states. Living conditions in Moscow and Leningrad, or Beijing and Shanghai, were vastly superior to rural areas.

it's one thing for living conditions to vary, and another for top party officials to live in decadence while people in rural areas face malnourishment and starvation. When party officials live in luxury while the peasantry that does all the labour starves, it becomes clear that the party has become an exploiter of the people on a national level.

It's also worth noting that within north korea, you need party permission to move from area to area. So it's not like the rural people can escape impoverishment and move to the capital.

>having to spend a large amount of its budget on military and nuclear deterrents

the militaristic culture is again a flaw of their ideology, since the a nuclear arsenal alone is enough of a deterrent by itself. US porky wouldn't risk washington dc getting nuked to further south korean porkys' interests

>The whole "caste system" stuff is spurious, see: http://www.rhizzone.net/article/2016/05/28/songbullshit/

interesting, looks like I was misinformed; I apologize. But my critique is hardly based on this, and more to do with the fact that a) party officials have become a new class of exploiters and there is practically no class mobility and b) they have twisted marxist concepts into justification of hereditary monarchy


 No.5180

File: 42b4d9e50b3dd17⋯.jpg (232.22 KB, 500x375, 4:3, kims.jpg)

>>5174

>hen party officials live in luxury while the peasantry that does all the labour starves, it becomes clear that the party has become an exploiter of the people on a national level.

"The party" is not a class though, and the individuals leading it have no ownership of capital or land.

>It's also worth noting that within north korea, you need party permission to move from area to area.

This system of "internal passports" existed in the USSR and China too. One of the purposes was so that urban areas wouldn't be totally swamped with people from the countryside in search of work, which in the DPRK's case would have been pretty disastrous during the 90s.

As far as the military goes, having nuclear weaponry isn't necessarily a deterrent if it's not backed up by a strong army, unless the DPRK had tons of nuclear weapons all over the country that couldn't be taken out in a single American strike. I think the strong emphasis on the military, to the extent it's portrayed as the vanguard of the revolution, while wrong is nonetheless based on imperialism trying to isolate and/or destroy it. Vietnam would probably be somewhat similar today if South Vietnam was still a thing and the US subjected the North to continued sanctions and military exercises.


 No.5181

>>5180

>"The party" is not a class though

ye it is, since there is limitation on where people are allowed to live. Someone from a farming family can't just pack up his bags and move to pyongyang, and even if you join the party in a rural area you will enjoy nowhere near the same privileges like someone whose family have been 3 generation party members.

>the individuals leading it have no ownership of capital or land

they have control of the state. if there are 100 people, one of them owns land, 9 are paid to hold guns and threaten the other 90 with violence to uphold his property rights, while the 90 have to work for him and offer him the surplus value of their labor or starve to death, it's capitalism. if 1 person pays 9 people with guns to gather all the crops from the commonly owned farms, and decided what is to be done with those crops while not "owning" them directly, while his position of authority is unquestionable and his mandate is considered infallible, the proletariat has literally 0 influence on how the MoP are handled. While property rights aren't a concept and hence it cannot be called capitalism, it is definitely not socialism and like i said more closely related to feudalism.

>far as the military goes, having nuclear weaponry isn't necessarily a deterrent if it's not backed up by a strong army, unless the DPRK had tons of nuclear weapons all over the country that couldn't be taken out in a single American strike

well ye, would probably be a lot cheaper too. if you had 2000 nuclear silos aimed at the world's capitals rigged with some fail-safe, no one in their right mind would invade. there are also a lot more fucked up weapons than nuclear ones, like biological agents.

>think the strong emphasis on the military, to the extent it's portrayed as the vanguard of the revolution, while wrong is nonetheless based on imperialism trying to isolate and/or destroy it

ye i agree, but what exactly are you defending when you're starving the proletariat to do so? are you not defending your own interests?


 No.5182

>>5180

>swamped with people from the countryside in search of work, which in the DPRK's case would have been pretty disastrous during the 90s.

How are people out of work if the economy is supposedly socialist?


 No.5183

>>5180

>This system of "internal passports" existed in the USSR and China too. One of the purposes was so that urban areas wouldn't be totally swamped with people from the countryside in search of work, which in the DPRK's case would have been pretty disastrous during the 90s.

dunno why I didn't read this. Why would people under a centralized planed economy be "searching for work"?


 No.5184

File: cd3ccfec661076e⋯.jpg (253.66 KB, 528x714, 88:119, Kim Il Sung and Kim Jong I….jpg)

>>5181

>ye it is, since there is limitation on where people are allowed to live. Someone from a farming family can't just pack up his bags and move to pyongyang, and even if you join the party in a rural area you will enjoy nowhere near the same privileges like someone whose family have been 3 generation party members.

Classes aren't about "privileges" though, they're about relations to the means of production. Being a party member did not give you ownership of land or capital.

> if there are 100 people, one of them owns land, 9 are paid to hold guns and threaten the other 90 with violence to uphold his property rights, while the 90 have to work for him and offer him the surplus value of their labor or starve to death

And what evidence do you have that "the 90 have to work for him [whoever that 'him' is] and offer him the surplus value of their labor"?

>what exactly are you defending when you're starving the proletariat to do so? are you not defending your own interests?

The DPRK's government is compelled to defend the socialist property form that forms the basis of the state. Unless a situation comes about where state officials can "quit their job" by abolishing the state and restoring private property, all their efforts remain oriented toward defending socialism in the northern half of Korea.

>Why would people under a centralized planed economy be "searching for work"?

Because urban jobs provided much more income than collective farm work, and living standards were much higher. For instance, there was no system of social security on Soviet farms until the 1960s, nor trade union representation until the 70s. Government investment priorities also very strongly favored industry over agriculture until the mid-late 50s.


 No.5187

>>5184

>Being a party member did not give you ownership of land or capital.

but since you are the one who decides how the product of labour is allocated, the concept of ownership isn't needed for exploitation to occur.

>And what evidence do you have that "the 90 have to work for him [whoever that 'him' is] and offer him the surplus value of their labor"?

what evidence? the position of the leader and the top party officials is hereditary, the proletariat has no way of deposing them nor do they have to answer to anyone

>The DPRK's government is compelled to defend the socialist property form that forms the basis of the state. Unless a situation comes about where state officials can "quit their job" by abolishing the state and restoring private property, all their efforts remain oriented toward defending socialism in the northern half of Korea

again, how is juche socialism when the head of state is a hereditary monarch? just because there is no private property, it doesn't make it socialism. The proletariat does not control the means of production

>Because urban jobs provided much more income than collective farm work, and living standards were much higher. For instance, there was no system of social security on Soviet farms until the 1960s, nor trade union representation until the 70s. Government investment priorities also very strongly favored industry over agriculture until the mid-late 50s.

the difference here being that in the DPRK people in rural areas are starving, not just living in worse conditions


 No.5417

File: 312449844381db3⋯.png (39.13 KB, 960x720, 4:3, ТВ_СКСР.png)

Hello comrades; I just found that video, you should watch it please say what you think about it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fb2VpW1HXv0&feature=youtu.be


 No.5464

File: 8a0ffb6c82f79f6⋯.jpg (499.74 KB, 800x530, 80:53, Kim Il Sung DIU 1926.jpg)

>>5187

Apologies for not getting back on this. I didn't see it initially.

>but since you are the one who decides how the product of labour is allocated, the concept of ownership isn't needed for exploitation to occur.

Yes it is. Allocating labor is not the equivalent of exploiting labor. Party officials do not accumulate capital.

>the position of the leader and the top party officials is hereditary, the proletariat has no way of deposing them nor do they have to answer to anyone

They have to "answer to" the logic of the socialist economy. The idea that Kim Jong Un and his associates are so powerful they can break Marxian analysis by merely existing is silly.

>how is juche socialism when the head of state is a hereditary monarch?

He isn't a monarch. There is no reason why a leading official being replaced with a son is somehow able to make a socialist country not-socialist anymore.

>The proletariat does not control the means of production

What would you define as control though?

>the difference here being that in the DPRK people in rural areas are starving, not just living in worse conditions

Starvation is due to adverse weather (such as flooding), the still-existing consequences of the collapse of the USSR, and economic sanctions by the West, which China is also complicit in (albeit with reluctance.)


 No.5536

So /marx/, why don't you move to North Korea?


 No.5538

File: 880182bd84276c1⋯.jpg (65.28 KB, 430x419, 430:419, Dean Reed avy.jpg)

>>5536

I'm not Korean, there's no reason to give up the struggle here at home, and the DPRK doesn't accept random Americans moving in their country.

There are Americans who moved to the DPRK and lived well enough, like Joe Dresnok. An American named Dean Reed became a very famous singer in the GDR and USSR: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lBZziSBxwwY


 No.5550

>>5464

>Yes it is. Allocating labor is not the equivalent of exploiting labor. Party officials do not accumulate capital

"ownership" of capital is terminology specific to capitalism, but non-elected high-ranking officials being able to freely allocate public resources as they see fit without workers' councils or elected representatives deciding where and how the allocation happens, means that there is no worker control over the means of production. If a capitalist decides to give the surplus value his employees create back to them, he is still a capitalist simply because the state provides him with the ability to dictate how the surplus value that his workers' created is distributed without the workers' having a say in it.

>They have to "answer to" the logic of the socialist economy

which means what exactly? so leaders-for-life who were not elected by the proletariat in any way and don't answer to either party or workers' councils have to answer to "socialist economy"? what does that even mean? the party itself has removed any reference to communism from it's own literature.

>He isn't a monarch. There is no reason why a leading official being replaced with a son is somehow able to make a socialist country not-socialist anymore

so 3 generations of hereditary succession without any form of election or proletarian mandate isn't monarchy? Have you read their ideology? Juche ideology deifies the "Leader" as an idealistic personification of the struggle of the people, thus making his will and judgement infallible. How does this idealistic mandate from a "higher power" differ from other monarchies? Because they use some abstract notion of "the struggle of the people" instead of "the will of god"?

>What would you define as control though?

Worker's councils consisted of workers that work in a specific branch of production manage said branch, while the party manages state affairs and resource allocation on an international and national level. The party of course must consist of a politburo that answers to the central committee and is elected by it, and a central committee that's elected by the party congress. All directing bodies of the party should be elected and everyone should be able to express opinions without fearing mock trials and executions, while complying to the principal of democratic centralism.

>Starvation is due to adverse weather (such as flooding), the still-existing consequences of the collapse of the USSR, and economic sanctions by the West, which China is also complicit in (albeit with reluctance.)

Yet how much of the budget goes to the military? how much better do party bureaucrats live compared to malnourished proletarians in the countryside? How is a bureaucrat who drives a bmw not exploiting the surplus value the grain farmer creates when one is living in unnecessary decadence and the other is starving? Did the farmer have a say in the distribution of his labour's surplus value?


 No.5551

File: 52ac94ccde8a556⋯.jpg (277.04 KB, 612x458, 306:229, Kim Jong Il in a rather da….jpg)

>>5550

>If a capitalist decides to give the surplus value his employees create back to them, he is still a capitalist simply because the state provides him with the ability to dictate how the surplus value that his workers' created is distributed without the workers' having a say in it.

No, he is a capitalist because he still buys labor-power, still owns the means of production and the land, and still extracts surplus-value. If he kept on giving the surplus to the workers he'd soon go out of business due to not making a profit, but the state has nothing to do with him being a capitalist or not.

>which means what exactly? so leaders-for-life who were not elected by the proletariat in any way and don't answer to either party or workers' councils have to answer to "socialist economy"? what does that even mean?

It means that, not based on private property and the accumulation of capital, but instead based on the socialist economy built in prior decades, the DPRK's leadership would have to actually dismantle the economy and abolish the present state structure, as occurred in the USSR.

It's entirely possible for state officials to be corrupt and/or lame, but that doesn't make them representatives of the bourgeoisie, let alone bourgeois themselves.

>the party itself has removed any reference to communism from it's own literature.

In "Respecting the Forerunners of the Revolution Is a Noble Moral Obligation of Revolutionaries" by Kim Jong Il and numerous other texts written in the 1990s and 2000s it was pointed out that Marxism had to be defended against attacks on it by anti-communists and revisionists. Political economy and other subjects taught in the DPRK are still clearly based on Marxism.

Also to my knowledge "communism" was dropped from the constitution a few years ago for the simple reason that the DPRK is in no position to achieve it any time soon.

>Because they use some abstract notion of "the struggle of the people" instead of "the will of god"?

Yes. That's a pretty big difference. According to Juche ideologists, "the Leader" originates from the people and derives his strength from them, and they from him/her. That obviously doesn't jibe with Divine Right which explicitly goes against popular sovereignty.

>Worker's councils consisted of workers that work in a specific branch of production manage said branch, while the party manages state affairs and resource allocation on an international and national level.

There was, at least in the 1970s, substantial worker participation in North Korean enterprises, as noted in academic works back then. I'd imagine a lot of this collapsed in the 90s due to the exigencies of coping with famine and the disruption of electricity, etc. which hampered planning.

>Yet how much of the budget goes to the military?

And whose fault is that when the US and South Korea regularly carry out military exercises (plus American troops are stationed in the South) and pressure the DPRK every which way?

>How is a bureaucrat who drives a bmw not exploiting the surplus value the grain farmer creates when one is living in unnecessary decadence and the other is starving?

Because that bureaucrat is not turning surplus-value into capital. He's not a landowner or kulak.

>Did the farmer have a say in the distribution of his labour's surplus value?

The worst you can say in this instance is that the particular ministry the bureaucrat was attached to was wasting funds. There's no capitalist relationship between the bureaucrat and the farmer. The bureaucrat in this case probably doesn't even own the car, and it's instead attached to his job.


 No.5556

>>5464

I know you were Hoxhaist so I was wary that you might have taken the wrong side on the DPRK.

Good to see you have your shit together and are thinking straight comrade. High quality post.


 No.7309

To anyone that happens to stumble on this thread, I'm this poster >>5168 and I've since researched the subject a lot more extensively. I don't know how corrupt or not the DPRK is, but it's political system is indeed a model of M-L. I'd simply like to note that Ismail was right in this argument.

Cheers


 No.7310

>>5536

because i have the misfortune of having quiet a few diseases in my early 20s and i'm pretty sure the imperialist embargoes make it risky for me to live there, since my access to medicine isn't guaranteed


 No.7623

File: 8ef47d9e43bee95⋯.jpg (1.6 MB, 3648x2736, 4:3, 8ef47d9e43bee95e1fea9f3b96….jpg)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KBcY8q30BIc

The book which accompanies this video is good too.

>>5141

To answer the question of "What is Juche?" in short, Juche can be described as being a form of social nationalism.


 No.7918

>>5551

Ismail, there's a discussion on /leftypol/ right now about the whole Otto Warmbier thing. I think it's definitely unjustifiable and far from "socialist" to sentence someone to 15 years of hard labor for stealing some irrelevant poster. Would you say this is justified? I hope you're not among the nutjobs that believe the guy was an actual CIA agent or some shit.


 No.7924

File: fde242d63e0daf7⋯.jpg (495.23 KB, 2200x1543, 2200:1543, Kim Jong Un.jpg)

>>7918

What seems to have happened is that Otto Warmbier decided to break the laws of the DPRK by taking down posters, and the authorities gave him an inordinately severe sentence as a warning to other foreigners. He wouldn't have served his full sentence; eventually he would be let out as part of a major or minor agreement with the US. Instead the authorities screwed up and he inadvertently died.

I don't think he was a CIA agent or whatever, just an idiot who treated the DPRK as one giant amusement park for Westerners rather than a country.


 No.7926

>>7924

Oh yeah, what the guy did was obviously idiotic. But giving him such a severe sentence seems neither a smart move in any regard (it's bad for their international position and bad for their tourist sector) nor something a government actually committed to Marxist principles would/should engage in.


 No.8067

>>7926

>nor something a government actually committed to Marxist principles would/should engage in.

This is a weird thing to say imo, where does marx state what acceptable sentences and jail times and which aren't.


 No.8068

>>8067

Socialism as I understand it is supposed to create a freeer society and abandon unnecessary hierarchies/privileges. I doubt Marx would approve of a 15 year hard labor term for "disrespecting" (and disrespecting in a very mild way) the head of state.


 No.8071

>>8068

>disrespecting the head of state

An attack against the dprk is an attack against the people, not against Kim (who isn't even the "head of state", as you are implying).

I fail to see how a lesser sentence is somehow less hierarchical.


 No.9070

Ismail, what do you think about the "Songun Policy"? I think it's pretty silly. The DPRK had a pretty steady economic growth until its implementation in the 80s, starting to pour all resources into the military. Didn't this bloated army contribute to the famine in 1994? Cuba had similar problems but never a famine of that kind of scale. Most people accuse Juche of the shortcomings of the DPRK's economic growth, but I think Songun has to be blamed for it, not necessarily Juche as a whole.

I mean, get real man. They have the fourth (!!!) biggest army on the planet. Is that really necessary?

Also, is it true that the DPRK pursued the path of self-sustaining independence and Songun after Krushchev pulled the missiles out of Cuba?


 No.9071

>>8071

the guy took a fucking poster away


 No.9072

>>9071

I think the sentence was more about sending a message than being correct in terms of jurisprudence.

Many tourists treat the DPRK as a live-action theme park. At some point you gotta send a message. Especially in their situation.


 No.9073

>>9072

>>9071

Also remember that the DPRK is still one of the safest countries on earth to travel to


 No.9074

>>9070

It’s either you build up the military or get steamrolled by America. Same thing with their nuclear program, either build more or they’ll invade


 No.9075

>>9070

To my knowledge the Songun policy began in the 90s as one of the ways to cope with the famine as well as the near-collapse of the international communist movement.

>Also, is it true that the DPRK pursued the path of self-sustaining independence and Songun after Krushchev pulled the missiles out of Cuba?

As I said, Songun began in the 90s, and Juche got started a few years after Stalin died. The DPRK strongly sympathized with China in the Sino-Soviet split, but didn't break with the USSR.

The army and nuclear program serve as a deterrent. Having seen Saddam Hussein give up Iraq's WMD program, and Gaddafi give up his WMD aspirations, I doubt the DPRK leadership has much of a reason to give up nuclear weapons considering where those two ended up.


 No.9093

To Ismail

Why did the DPRK and the WPK remove mentions of Communism being the WPK and the DPRKs goal from the constiution / other important docs etc?


 No.9095

>>9093

The context of "communism" existing in the older DPRK constitutions is as follows:

>The Democratic People's Republic of Korea shall, by carrying out a thorough cultural revolution, train all the people to be builders of socialism and communism equipped with a profound knowledge of nature and society and a high level of culture and technology, thus making the whole of society intellectual.

Since the idea of the DPRK achieving communism any time soon is a bit silly in retrospect, it was decided to drop the word in the constitution.

Constitutions of socialist countries are meant to reflect their existing realities, hence why the Soviet Constitution of 1936 came into being once socialism was built.


 No.9099

>>9072

True, however no matter their motivation I have strong doubts about a """socialist""" government that thinks it's ever justifiable to punish some tourist this severely. Seems pretty anti-socialist to use a fellow prole to set an example instead of aiming its attacks/propaganda solely against the American government and bourgeois class.

>>9073

Not really relevant to this topic tbh


 No.9112

File: 150eaedbc2da003⋯.jpg (18.69 KB, 400x300, 4:3, leader-vladimir-head-lenin.jpg)

Could someone explain:

Why did they remove all mentions of Marx, Lenin and such from their discourses (wich maybe I can understand as they see Juche as an advancement over ML)

Why did they remove every statue, or portrait of Marx, Engels and Lenin?

Do they support other countries communist parties?

Thanks in advance


 No.9115

>>9112

the /DPRK/ thread anon on /leftypol/ claims that the DPRK maintains links with his party (KPD i think)

DPRK sent a rep to speak at a Rally by some Meme M-L group in the UK (CPGB-ML iirc) and also Support the fucking Vatan Party in Turkey of all people


 No.9116

>>9095

But still wouldnt it be good to at least mention it in there somewhere to dissuade confusion of the DPRK's long term goal and to "Keep their eyes on the prize" so to speak?


 No.9122

>>9115

DPRK anon here, this is correct, DPRK maintains good relations with the KPD. Recently a consule from the North Korean embassy (which is also a youth hostel lol) in Berlin visited the KPD. There was actually an article about this on our website www.k-p-d.de but I can't find it right now.

Schöwitz, our chairman, visited the DPRK two times and was officially invited both times by the WPK to my knowledge. But yeah, I generally agree with your sentiment that the DPRK tends to support fringe parties (we are a fringe party too) which can be weird sometimes.


 No.9124

>>9115

>>9122

Just looked up the Vatan Party, that's some hardcore NazBol stuff wtf.

By the way, the WPK does participate in the IMCWP - many more eurocommunist and more moderate parties go there, so that's an exception.


 No.9125

>>9112

The DPRK, as you note, considers Juche an advance over Marxism-Leninism and has increasingly emphasized the "indigenous" nature of its revolution and theories, especially since 1991.

They continue to uphold Marx, Engels, Lenin and Stalin as precursors though, hence Kim Jong Il's work "Respecting the Forerunners of the Revolution is a Noble Moral Obligation of Revolutionaries."

>>9124

The DPRK seems to solicit support from wherever it can obtain it, no matter how dubious. Hence the absurdities noted in this link: https://www.nknews.org/2013/05/white-power-and-apocalyptic-cults-pro-dprk-americans-revealed/

Post last edited at

 No.9127

>>9125

It's worth noting that they have written several letters to the guy to stop posting white supremacist stuff. So it's obvious they don't actually agree with it.


 No.9129

>>9127

That's true, but it's still pretty ridiculous that DPRK officials thought it'd be a good idea to send propaganda materials to two persons living in a remote trailer who claimed to uphold Pol Pot and Jim Jones.

DPRK officials did actually visit and send materials to Jonestown back in the day, but that was a communal settlement of a thousand people on good terms with the Guyanese government (which was itself friendly to the DPRK), so at least that made sense.

Also, years ago I contacted a guy who was ostensibly the co-founder of the "Songun Politics Study Group (USA)" with John Paul Cupp back in 2003. This is what he wrote:

>When I was eighteen I decided to drop out of society and await the inevitable collapse of capitalist civilization that I thought to be imminent at the time. After travelling around a bit I settled into a homeless encampment in Portland, Oregon called, "Dignity Village." I met Cupp at this camp and when he found that I was also a Marxist we became friends. Cupp is a natural fanatic and he was constantly creating a whole alphabet soup of 1-3 organizations, I'm sure there is probably a psychological explanation for his obsessive personality. One day, he asked me if I wanted to be a part of the DPRK solidarity group he was starting and I said it sounded fine to me without giving it much thought. I was pretty startled the next week when we were mentioned by name in the KCNA. I always had my reservations about the DPRK, but I trusted Cupp at the time as I thought him to be a stalwart Marxist-Leninist and as a bit of a punk kid I also just liked that it shocked people. . . .

>Unfortunately, I no longer have any of the materials that we were sent during my time as "general secretary." We used to get New Years cards each year and packages with CD's of propaganda. I remember one was half anti-American punk rock from South Korea (including a song that compared George W. Bush to some sort of sponge cake) and half traditional DPRK propaganda about how lotus flowers fell from heaven when Kim Jong Il was born and stuff like that. In addition to this, the Portland Public Library actually had a great deal of DPRK works in English that Cupp would spend a great deal of time typing directly onto his website.

Post last edited at

 No.9131

>>9116

>But still wouldnt it be good to at least mention it in there somewhere to dissuade confusion of the DPRK's long term goal and to "Keep their eyes on the prize" so to speak?

The Cuban constitution does that ("The Communist Party of Cuba. . . guides the common effort toward the goals of the construction of socialism and the progress toward a communist society") but the constitutions of China, Vietnam and Laos do not.

On the other hand, it seems a bit unnecessary for a constitution of a socialist country to say "also we want communism one day," so I don't think it matters. To give a similar example, Cuba is merely called the Republic of Cuba and its flag has been the exact same since 1902. It doesn't need to call itself the Democratic People's Soviet Socialist Republic of Cuba and replace the star on said flag with a hammer and sickle to "prove" it's genuinely socialist.

Post last edited at

 No.9268

What do you think about this article about the DPRK, from a clearly bourgeois author ("privatization is inevitable")?

https://www.38north.org/2018/08/rfrank080818/


 No.9269

>>9268

As early as 1991 the DPRK has been trying to obtain foreign investment via special economic zones. Kim Jong Un has indeed made improving the economy the major goal, and he presumably would like to emulate China to some extent.


 No.9276

>>9070

It would be incorrect to assume that the DPRK military is a net drag on their economy. Their soldiers actually serve the people. They work on construction, harvesting, and similar projects. Many of those new buildings that have been built lately are built by soldiers. This is how all socialist armies should operate. Serving the people in this way is certainly better for morale and training than sitting around in a base all the time.


 No.9526

What's your take on the DPRKs recent moves to begin intergration of Crypto currency into its economy?

https://www.ccn.com/north-korea-to-host-its-first-ever-international-crypto-conference-report/


 No.9527

>>9526

I have no opinion. It's obviously meant to help overcome sanctions.




[Return][Go to top][Catalog][Nerve Center][Cancer][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[]
[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / animu / fascist / fast / general / hisrol / tacos / vg / vichan ]