North Korea second happiest country in the world, China's #1

[Hallistar]

You cannot just respond to two of his points and claim that covers all of it.

1) Sure I can, if the rest of his(her) arguments boil down to those two points.

2) It is, of course, academic, because I did not do so.

Unlike whatever CrackerJack box you fished your education out of, I do not give points for "just showing up." Now that you have shown, once again, your inability or unwillingness to read my posts and/or respond to them with anything resembling an argument (remember, that is an assertion supported by reasoning and/or argumentation), are you going to actually contribute anything substantive?

Did you not read "You cannot just respond to two of his points and claim that covers all of it. Nevermind you just edited the entire post I saw before, gimmie a sec here"?

And I don't care what you give points on for showing up, I have seen others responding to your posts with reasoning and you are flatly denying this and claiming they are not offering anything substantive, and replacing it with what you say that makes sense to you and thinking that will convince everyone and is the final word to it. And since you dont want others to make fun of socialism, I'd appreciate it if you didn't make fun of my education either. Thanks.

[Tokyoni]

Makes sense to me. Such a cleaner, more rational, human-centric society instead of this alienating consumerist travesty of the industrialized west. If I recall in past years, Nigeria also ranked quite high despite lack of wealth because of its close family ties and high social structure. Just proves that capitalism isn't everything.

Also, the music is WAY better:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eLWaHxQaNnk

Absolutely beautiful. Reminiscent in some ways of the better traits of Western music a few hundred years ago before the industrial revolution distorted and alienated the culture. Promotes intelligence and a rational mindset; I literally feel more alive listening to this sort of music.

What's popular in the US these days? Audio diarrhea like Ke$ha...

[Hallistar]

Makes sense to me. Such a cleaner, more rational, human-centric society instead of this alienating consumerist travesty of the industrialized west. If I recall in past years, Nigeria also ranked quite high despite lack of wealth because of its close family ties and high social structure. Just proves that capitalism isn't everything.

Also, the music is WAY better:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eLWaHxQaNnk

What's the US have? Audio diarrhea like Ke$ha...

Putting off the obvious fact that North Korea clearly made up this survey (When all the oppressive countries are highest and western are lowest), in reality I would support a socialist society/one that was not so focused on capitalism if such a system ensured everyone was not in poverty, their needs met and they were living a good life. Famine and corruption from oppressive governments turns them away from the real meaning of socialism and just corrupts everything, and unfortunately, I cannot see one self-declared communist nation that has an uncorrupt government that does not torture it's citizens and that does not have many in poverty. For god's sakes north Korea is guilty of so many crimes instituted by it's government on it's however, with people having suffered from vivisection in it's prisons and/or killed, etc. Power-outages are common there and a need for international aid is prevalent. Multiple quality of life indexes conducted did not even include North Korea because of the lack of much information from the people including Health, Education and Life style, and the rankings were more reasonable for most nations.
Ps I do hate american music as well

[Sibirsky]

Goodness no! Predatory lenders and black-mail-by-foreign-aid swoop in and keep that from happening, at the low, low price of forcing the country in question to deregulate all its industries and cut public spending to the bone, leaving it vulnerable to systematic corporate exploitation of its resources and population. Asia, Africa, South America, the Caribbean, it is the same old story.

The World Bank and the IMF? Other than deregulating, I actually agree with this. Don't forget that to go with cutting public spending to the bone, they suggest raising taxes. It's all done to bail out their banker friends. Also don't forget that other than loan repayments they are taxpayer funded organizations. Now, what in the world makes you think I support these organizations, or that they are capitalist?

Ironically, a cookie cutter socialist politician ran it last. Raping and pillaging the world. And I thought socialists only raped in the figurative sense. Thank god for Dominique Strauss-Kahn taking rape to a new level! And what a socialist he is. Facing serious charges and deemed a flight risk he is confined to a $14 million apartment. Staying in $3000 a night rooms. Flying first class on Air France. Two multi million dollar apartments in Paris, and a house in Georgetown. Yes, definitely a cookie cutter socialist politician. Of course this is all good for the people. He cares for and loves the people.

It sure as hell is for people who depend on those industries. It sure as hell is when a country is so impoverished as a result that it is forced to give up any control it has over its economic destiny to external, hostile forces.

Of course it's painful. That doesn't make it a bad thing. In 1900 in the US we had more than 20 million farmers, feeding a nation of 76 million people. Today, we have less than 1 million farmers feeding a nation of 310 million people. As the nation grew by 234 million, we had more than 19 million job losses in agriculture. Are you going to tell me that's a bad thing? Far from it. It's an excellent thing. That freed up 19 million people to do something else. Farming machinery is an obvious example. Manufacturing and maintaining.

Again you substitute infantile name-calling for actual argumentation.

Socialism is a perfectly understandable reaction to the very real dangers and injustices of capitalist and colonialist exploitation. For centuries, privileged groups and nations, bearing out the perverse impulses of Capitalism, have run rough-shod over the people, institutions, and environment of this planet and, when a meaningful alternative comes along (socialism, in whatever form) it is attacked with every weapon available.

That's not name calling. There are no perverse impulses in capitalism. Socialism is responsible for far more environmental damage.

There is nothing voluntary about the "free market." Refuse to participate, you die. Try to establish an alternative, the elites kill you. Refuse to consume the right thing at the right time in the right way and the economy screams until hardship forces the sort of consumption needed (note the increasingly common tragicomedic sight of Western politicians pleading with consumers to spend more, to buy anything, to waste their money, so long as it keeps the economy going).

So politicians have it a bit backwards, this is shocking? They aren't smart, they're just good liars by necessity. You can't win an election by running an honest campaign. You have to promise more benefits, without raising taxes.

Sure it does. Likewise, teachers and public officials all over, say, the United States are still unable to be affiliated with communism and are often made to swear loyalty oaths. Children in American schools swear loyalty to the country and the system every day! This is not even to get into the less official forms of blacklisting.

Likewise, of course, the West deals with dissident nations (nations that truly seek alternatives to Capitalism) with extreme brutality: sabotage, embargoes, sanctions, wars.

Teachers are not questioned about politics prior to hire. Children do not swear loyalty to the country or the system. As far as the wars, what makes you think I support that?

Communist nations never refused to trade with Western ones. As for the rest, it was done in self-defense: Communist nations were, to a one, attacked and persecuted from the moment they were founded by Western imperialist powers. That they should respond is, frankly, understandable.

There was very little trade between the USSR and the west. Yes, the were some embargoes, but nothing like Cuba or North Korea. The USSR refused to buy many products from the west.

...Trade in drugs and prohibited items.

More revisionist history! How refreshing. The Canton System not only restricted certain items, but it restricted the European's access to the mainland, no matter what the goods were.

The Chinese economy is more controlled by the West every day, forcing China to spend billions trying to sustain crumbling Capitalist economies in the US just to keep its market share intact. China has become more brutal than ever in cracking down on attempts at labor organization and, all the while, has become one of the worst polluters on the planet.

It's not controlled by the west. They are big boys and think for themselves. Being brutal as far as labor reform, well that's an authoritarian government for you. You're the one defending those governments, not me. Being a larger polluter as the economy grows is common. They are using more energy, after all. We need to trade more with them. And as their economy grows further, and they get richer two things will happen. They Chinese will demand cleaner technology. And they will be able to afford it. Call it growing pains.

What are you babbling about?

I support my points. You do not. I have given the readers of this forum reasons to believe what I say. You have not. What part of this is giving you trouble?

You're the one babbling. You give readers nothing but bullshit. My points are supported by reality. Your points are supported by revisionism.

"I know you are but what am I?" Again, you demonstrate your infantile inability to make a rational point and, instead, fall back on name-calling! You are embarassing yourself!

Likewise, of course, you have not called attention to a single flaw in my understanding of economics (although you certainly have shown your own inability to distinguish between correlation and causation, support your assertions, or refrain from childish temper tantrums when challenged).

You were name calling, I answered in kind. The mere fact that you are defending socialism, to the fullest, is evidence that you do not grasp the reality of economics. Without free markets, you cannot allocate resources efficiently. And that's just the tip of the iceberg.

You are right. My denial of reality is as dubious as can be: it is non-existent (because, of course, I am not denying reality). Looks like someone does not even have the basic grammatical competence to recognize a double negative.

And again, Sibi sidesteps my point.

And you're a grammar Nazi! A man of many hats. It was pointed out to you, that English is not my native language. I think I do well enough.

You have not posted a single fact. Frankly, you have not posted a single argument. You have repeated a series of unsubstantiated assertions (which I have challenged, using reasoning and examples) and, worse still, have employed fallacies (ad hominem, ad populum, argument from authority, appeal to pity) to attempt to cover your woeful inadequacies as an interlocutor.

You recite your droning platitudes and scream and cry when I do not fall blindly into line, indeed, when I dare to ask you to support your absurd claims.

Absurd claims? Reality is not an absurd claim. I provided examples, and reasons. You disagree with them because your religion disagrees with them. Not my problem. That's your problem.

Ah, the typical capitalist platitude: Leave them no options and then point out that "the alternatives are far, far worse," conveniently ignoring the fact that this lack of options is precisely the fault of capitalist exploitation to begin with.

More garbage. The Canton System started it, and of course, much, much later, Mao finished it. He's the one that left the Chinese with few options. The west had nothing to do with it.

Nope. You are just denying what caused those problem.

That would be you. I'm talking about the reality of the Canton System starting China's collapse, from being economically better off than Western Europe, and collapsing to one of the world's poorest nations under Mao. And coming back again once they implemented (however gradually) market based reforms, along with trade, they have seen unprecedented growth.

[Niur]

Well good for them. I hope they're happy about being the second happiest in the world.

[Harata]

No wonder they're so "happy." Their governments push so much dishonest propaganda about how poor and oppressed non-communist countries are, while saying that they are "free," using a very perverse definition of "free." China's perhaps not as bad about this as N Korea, but they're not much better. As for North Korea, their government straight-up lies to them so much I'd be surprised if they even realized that they're considered an international pariah. Okay, rant's over.

[Norstal]

Makes sense to me. Such a cleaner, more rational, human-centric society instead of this alienating consumerist travesty of the industrialized west. If I recall in past years, Nigeria also ranked quite high despite lack of wealth because of its close family ties and high social structure. Just proves that capitalism isn't everything.

Also, the music is WAY better:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eLWaHxQaNnk

Absolutely beautiful. Reminiscent in some ways of the better traits of Western music a few hundred years ago before the industrial revolution distorted and alienated the culture. Promotes intelligence and a rational mindset; I literally feel more alive listening to this sort of music.

What's popular in the US these days? Audio diarrhea like Ke$ha...

And thus why I support ending foreign aid to NK.

[Hallistar]

You have not posted a single fact. Frankly, you have not posted a single argument. You have repeated a series of unsubstantiated assertions (which I have challenged, using reasoning and examples) and, worse still, have employed fallacies (ad hominem, ad populum, argument from authority, appeal to pity) to attempt to cover your woeful inadequacies as an interlocutor.

You recite your droning platitudes and scream and cry when I do not fall blindly into line, indeed, when I dare to ask you to support your absurd claims.

Absurd claims? Reality is not an absurd claim. I provided examples, and reasons. You disagree with them because your religion disagrees with them. Not my problem. That's your problem.

Yet everyone who disagrees with him supposedly has not posted a single fact, has unsubstantiated assertions, and always use fallacies, while he of course is the master 'interlocutor' and "argues" properly. Funny that..

[Sibirsky]

Absurd claims? Reality is not an absurd claim. I provided examples, and reasons. You disagree with them because your religion disagrees with them. Not my problem. That's your problem.

Yet everyone who disagrees with him supposedly has not posted a single fact, has unsubstantiated assertions, and always use fallacies, while he of course is the master 'interlocutor' and "argues" properly. Funny that..

Yeah, it's interesting. I admit, I did not start off my debate with him on a high note. I did make a valid judgement in the fact that it would be pointless, however.

[Norstal]

Absurd claims? Reality is not an absurd claim. I provided examples, and reasons. You disagree with them because your religion disagrees with them. Not my problem. That's your problem.

Yet everyone who disagrees with him supposedly has not posted a single fact, has unsubstantiated assertions, and always use fallacies, while he of course is the master 'interlocutor' and "argues" properly. Funny that..

What can I say. Sibirsky is the TCT of economics. Well, except less sources, but still, he's good.

[Sibirsky]

Makes sense to me. Such a cleaner, more rational, human-centric society instead of this alienating consumerist travesty of the industrialized west. If I recall in past years, Nigeria also ranked quite high despite lack of wealth because of its close family ties and high social structure. Just proves that capitalism isn't everything.

Also, the music is WAY better:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eLWaHxQaNnk

Absolutely beautiful. Reminiscent in some ways of the better traits of Western music a few hundred years ago before the industrial revolution distorted and alienated the culture. Promotes intelligence and a rational mindset; I literally feel more alive listening to this sort of music.

What's popular in the US these days? Audio diarrhea like Ke$ha...

The music is a matter of taste. And frankly, that's not my taste. And who gives a shit about the music? We at least have choice in our music. The Koreans in the north can listen to that, or nothing at all.

[Vetalia]

I'm just amused by the fact that the music is broadcast on the capitalist YouTube service...good luck getting that in North Korea. You'd be lucky to have much more than a radio, if you got electricity at all.

[Sibirsky]

Yet everyone who disagrees with him supposedly has not posted a single fact, has unsubstantiated assertions, and always use fallacies, while he of course is the master 'interlocutor' and "argues" properly. Funny that..

What can I say. Sibirsky is the TCT of economics. Well, except less sources, but still, he's good.

TCT is unbeatable in the source department. In any field. Hydesland, probably comes closest in economics, as far as sources go.

[Hallistar]

Yet everyone who disagrees with him supposedly has not posted a single fact, has unsubstantiated assertions, and always use fallacies, while he of course is the master 'interlocutor' and "argues" properly. Funny that..

Yeah, it's interesting. I admit, I did not start off my debate with him on a high note. I did make a valid judgement in the fact that it would be pointless, however.

And in the end, he'll supposedly have "won" the (i.e. everyone else gives up) arguement debate whatever he likes to formally call it, and thus again feel better about himself, while we are pretty much the 'clueless capitalists who were proven wrong'...frankly I'd rather get my information from an actual economist who shows thoroughly the basics of how an economy works, and not some socialist revised half-assed version of it. Capitalism does have it's flaws, but I have never seen any communist nation with a planned economy doing well in the first place.

[Sibirsky]

Yeah, it's interesting. I admit, I did not start off my debate with him on a high note. I did make a valid judgement in the fact that it would be pointless, however.

And in the end, he'll supposedly have "won" the (i.e. everyone else gives up) arguement debate whatever he likes to formally call it, and thus again feel better about himself, while we are pretty much the 'clueless capitalists who were proven wrong'...frankly I'd rather get my information from an actual economist who shows thoroughly the basics of how an economy works, and not some socialist revised half-assed version of it. Capitalism does have it's flaws, but I have never seen any communist nation with a planned economy doing well in the first place.

No capitalist (in his right mind anyway) is promising a perfect society. Mainly due to those flaws. We can address them, but we can't eliminate them.

[Hallistar]

And in the end, he'll supposedly have "won" the (i.e. everyone else gives up) arguement debate whatever he likes to formally call it, and thus again feel better about himself, while we are pretty much the 'clueless capitalists who were proven wrong'...frankly I'd rather get my information from an actual economist who shows thoroughly the basics of how an economy works, and not some socialist revised half-assed version of it. Capitalism does have it's flaws, but I have never seen any communist nation with a planned economy doing well in the first place.

No capitalist (in his right mind anyway) is promising a perfect society. Mainly due to those flaws. We can address them, but we can't eliminate them.

True, and it is pretty much the best solution for now as compared to a planned economy. The future may provide us with technologies though that could make some of these other alternatives feasible.

I still am not sure how though how this is a "bizarre version of things", however:

"Yes........surely how pathetic....yet Isn't China for example the one that is buying all these securities and other United States assets? Is China not a supplier of multiple goods that the United States purchases? Wouldn't the US be dependent upon China for certain goods from there and for an economic boost by selling these monetary assets? China also has it's own internal markets as well and other countries to trade to, but in terms of exploitation, if you mean that you want them to be able to raise the price of their products to pay their workers more, then people in the U.S. might prefer to not buy products that have been imported that cost a higher price, thus leading to an overall lesser demand for Chinese goods. The United State's form of effect on China is the levels of demand for products from it, the issue of subsidising things and reducing the demand for goods from other countries plays into the concept of demand. The effect on smaller countries from the US also comes from its consumers and their demand for items from those countries at certain prices. Yes, there will be businesses and there are facets of the system that will try to make a rather lowered price from sellers still high in the states because they might want a larger profit than they should have and thus end up lowering the demand for such goods from other countries due to still high prices. This does leave out the whole issue of countries such as China devaluing it's currency, however."

[Sibirsky]

No capitalist (in his right mind anyway) is promising a perfect society. Mainly due to those flaws. We can address them, but we can't eliminate them.

True, and it is pretty much the best solution for now as compared to a planned economy. The future may provide us with technologies though that could make some of these other alternatives feasible.

I still am not sure how though how this is a "bizarre version of things", however:

"Yes........surely how pathetic....yet Isn't China for example the one that is buying all these securities and other United States assets? Is China not a supplier of multiple goods that the United States purchases? Wouldn't the US be dependent upon China for certain goods from there and for an economic boost by selling these monetary assets? China also has it's own internal markets as well and other countries to trade to, but in terms of exploitation, if you mean that you want them to be able to raise the price of their products to pay their workers more, then people in the U.S. might prefer to not buy products that have been imported that cost a higher price, thus leading to an overall lesser demand for Chinese goods. The United State's form of effect on China is the levels of demand for products from it, the issue of subsidising things and reducing the demand for goods from other countries plays into the concept of demand. The effect on smaller countries from the US also comes from its consumers and their demand for items from those countries at certain prices. Yes, there will be businesses and there are facets of the system that will try to make a rather lowered price from sellers still high in the states because they might want a larger profit than they should have and thus end up lowering the demand for such goods from other countries due to still high prices. This does leave out the whole issue of countries such as China devaluing it's currency, however."

China is already losing pricing power. There are other, cheaper nations out there. China makes up for it through infrastructure that already exists and capacity. But eventually, they will not be the producer of cheap stuff. Someone else will. China will graduate to more valuable things, like capital equipment, for example.

[Hallistar]

True, and it is pretty much the best solution for now as compared to a planned economy. The future may provide us with technologies though that could make some of these other alternatives feasible.

I still am not sure how though how this is a "bizarre version of things", however:

"Yes........surely how pathetic....yet Isn't China for example the one that is buying all these securities and other United States assets? Is China not a supplier of multiple goods that the United States purchases? Wouldn't the US be dependent upon China for certain goods from there and for an economic boost by selling these monetary assets? China also has it's own internal markets as well and other countries to trade to, but in terms of exploitation, if you mean that you want them to be able to raise the price of their products to pay their workers more, then people in the U.S. might prefer to not buy products that have been imported that cost a higher price, thus leading to an overall lesser demand for Chinese goods. The United State's form of effect on China is the levels of demand for products from it, the issue of subsidising things and reducing the demand for goods from other countries plays into the concept of demand. The effect on smaller countries from the US also comes from its consumers and their demand for items from those countries at certain prices. Yes, there will be businesses and there are facets of the system that will try to make a rather lowered price from sellers still high in the states because they might want a larger profit than they should have and thus end up lowering the demand for such goods from other countries due to still high prices. This does leave out the whole issue of countries such as China devaluing it's currency, however."

China is already losing pricing power. There are other, cheaper nations out there. China makes up for it through infrastructure that already exists and capacity. But eventually, they will not be the producer of cheap stuff. Someone else will. China will graduate to more valuable things, like capital equipment, for example.

True, China at the state of it's economy at the moment has the infrastructure and capacity for capital equipment and such assets, enabling other organizations to produce other commodities from those, I suppose in a way similar to the middle eastern gulf states, that on top of their oil wealth, have massive business and info-tech infrastructure being built in order to have more of that general capacity and to handle such assets, and not entirely having to rely on the sale of oil. Cheaper stuff in terms of production would not work for China much also in a part due to the rising demand by it's population, who are now more generally affluent than they were before.

[Vetalia]

China is already losing pricing power. There are other, cheaper nations out there. China makes up for it through infrastructure that already exists and capacity. But eventually, they will not be the producer of cheap stuff. Someone else will. China will graduate to more valuable things, like capital equipment, for example.

Yeah, the cost of manufacturing in the coastal cities is approaching parity with doing it domestically in the U.S...they can relocate inland but even that's starting to diminish in cost-effectiveness. I believe this is partially why manufacturing-intensive areas in the U.S. have outpaced others in the post-recession environment.

In general, I'd say the days of widespread offshoring are coming to a close; the cost savings are shrinking as is the quality of the available labor, as more and more domestic firms start to compete with foreign ones for the same talent. The good thing, of course, is this is because those other countries are getting richer...actually, taking a look at the Google Trends results for "offshoring" shows decreasing interest and activity clearly.

[Frei Volk]

politicians will say almost anything. after all, america claims to be the most moral and most free, neither of which it comes close to being either.

happiest might be someplace like the maldives and most free might be someplace like sweeden. morality might be in how one defines it. maybe canada or new zealand. hard to say.

Can't tell if trolling or really stupid...

[Sibirsky]

China is already losing pricing power. There are other, cheaper nations out there. China makes up for it through infrastructure that already exists and capacity. But eventually, they will not be the producer of cheap stuff. Someone else will. China will graduate to more valuable things, like capital equipment, for example.

Yeah, the cost of manufacturing in the coastal cities is approaching parity with doing it domestically in the U.S...they can relocate inland but even that's starting to diminish in cost-effectiveness. I believe this is partially why manufacturing-intensive areas in the U.S. have outpaced others in the post-recession environment.

In general, I'd say the days of widespread offshoring are coming to a close; the cost savings are shrinking as is the quality of the available labor, as more and more domestic firms start to compete with foreign ones for the same talent. The good thing, of course, is this is because those other countries are getting richer...actually, taking a look at the Google Trends results for "offshoring" shows decreasing interest and activity clearly.

Caterpillar, which had plants in China, is now building 3 (IIRC) new plants in... the United States.

But back to my original point. I think it was Intel, they decided to build a plant abroad and picked... not China. They picked the Philippines. For numerous reasons, one of which was the cost of labor.

Again, last year, rural wages in China rose 14.9%.

[Sibirsky]

politicians will say almost anything. after all, america claims to be the most moral and most free, neither of which it comes close to being either.

happiest might be someplace like the maldives and most free might be someplace like sweeden. morality might be in how one defines it. maybe canada or new zealand. hard to say.

Can't tell if trolling or really stupid...

According to the Freedom Index (if you select all categories, and put them all on maximum importance "crucial") Switzerland is the most free nation. The US is 5th. Pretty damn good. And was #1 as recently as 2 years ago.

We rank 2nd in gun rights. We're not in the top 10 in any other category. Which just means that no nation dominates the rankings, since we get 5th overall from 1 top 10 ranking in 9 categories.

http://www.freeexistence.org/freedom.shtml

[Vetalia]

Caterpillar, which had plants in China, is now building 3 (IIRC) new plants in... the United States.

But back to my original point. I think it was Intel, they decided to build a plant abroad and picked... not China. They picked the Philippines. For numerous reasons, one of which was the cost of labor.

Again, last year, rural wages in China rose 14.9%.

Yeah, for a lot of work it's becoming much more worthwhile to build plants in the U.S...you're avoiding the logistical issues, the rising cost of labor and perhaps most importantly the corruption and government obfuscation involved in investing in China. Of course, the last issue has always been around but now you also have to contend with the fact that the labor isn't that cheap and you'll have to deal with high turnover and falling labor quality to boot, so it's much less attractive to deal with that rather than just invest in a plant in the U.S. and avoid all that.

Another issue is that the places where labor is still cheap are far from the coastal ports and lack the infrastructure to make building major plants there worthwhile (e.g. Yunnan), so China will need to focus on moving up the value chain or be stuck in a situation where they're too expensive for low-value work but lack the infrastructure for higher-value manufacturing. The same is happening to India, too, but they still have some more room to grow as their labor costs are still much lower than China's.

On the other hand, China has a serious problem with unemployed college graduates; hopefully, they'll be moving up the value chain enough to create jobs for them or else it'll be serious trouble.

[Tokyoni]

The music is a matter of taste. And frankly, that's not my taste. And who gives a shit about the music? We at least have choice in our music. The Koreans in the north can listen to that, or nothing at all.

If I might be frank here... Yes, the choice in music in itself is a choice. And in itself trivial sure. If you prefer vapid autotuned songs about drinking and fucking instead of classical/neo-classical music (which has been correlated with intelligence, but whatever. xP) But the aggregate cultural preferences are symptomatic of something much, much deeper.

Let's forget politics and economics per se right now. Let's forget who's running the country, who owns capital, and look purely to a social level. This image really well expresses the growing sentiments I've been having about the western world in general and America in particular:



As far as I'm concerned, American culture in aggregate is the most dehumanizing, vapid, anti-intellectual, lazy, disgusting, animalistic culture I think the world has ever seen. Certainly there are the rare, thankful exceptions to this, but I think that American culture is for the advancement of the human consciousness much akin to a deadly poison.

A rhetorical question: What is it that separates humans from other animals? As a matter of genetics, we're only really a hair's breadth away from a chimpanzee or bonobo. We are genetically closer to these species than any of us are to others. So there's nothing remarkably "magical" about the genetic definition itself. By our DNA, we're just as "animal" as any other species. Neither is it our strength - as lions and bears, and nay, even most other apes are significantly stronger than humans. Nor is it accumulation of material goods - as squirrels exhibit such behavior.

What separates human beings from other animals is our ability to think, to reason, to understand and comprehend beauty and philosophy, to better ourselves by our own efforts. These are what define who we are, as beings with a higher degree of consciousness than other animals, and all that really makes us distinct. Lacking this, we are just another ape, another primate, another mammal, another animal.

And it seems that every trait that we have that separates us from animals, American culture reviles. Intellectuals for the most part are marginalized, often outright mocked in our culture, and such is seen as normal. American culture idolizes the vapid, the hedonistic, the anti-intellectual. With few exceptions our culture's celebrities - the wealthiest, most famous individuals - are not those who advance our level of knowledge or consciousness, but rather idiotic individuals who are only attractive in a skin-deep fashion, lacking any real character or mindset to strive for more, to improve themselves, to improve mankind.

How could any rational person justify a society in which such worthless vapid celebrities parade around with millions upon millions of dollars and are worshiped by good sections of the populace almost as gods; when the group of brilliant scientists working around the clock to find a cure for cancer, the teacher who works her ass off trying to provide a better education and future for her pupils, the firefighter who puts his life on the line to help save the lives of others - all of them, with few exceptions live unknown and often with barely enough to get by. Our society has contempt for those most noble, human amongst us and worship for the most worthless. An utterly backwards, disgusting way of things. And I absolutely despise it.

As an anecdote that really brought this line of thought alive to me tonight. Earlier this evening, my girlfriend and I were going on a date to a local movie theatre. It was showing a film - for only this weekend as I understand it - that we thought was quite interesting (and if it's in your theatre, I highly recommend you see it). Titled "Winter in Wartime", it was a Dutch film regarding a family living in Holland during WWII who joined the Resistance to the Nazis. Absolutely brilliantly done film. It lacked much of the flashy cinematics and CGI of modern Hollywood, but it told a beautiful, very intelligently-written story of incredibly heroic human beings fighting for a better world at the risk of their own lives. The theatre was a medium-sized theatre. About 15 different theatres within showing films. So anyhow, we went to pay for our tickets. As far as I could tell, I was the only one in line (out of several couples I saw) who paid for my girlfriend's ticket. My first bit of revulsion at the decay of this culture; in itself trivial perhaps, but a symptom of a society that has little respect for women. Anyhow, I quickly shoved the idea out of my mind, and entered the theatre. Surprise, surprise, it was the smallest theatre in the complex for our film, and at least at that showing, we were the only two in the audience. It made for a wonderfully quiet, peaceful experience, but in a way it really, really depressed me in hindsight. Here was this absolutely brilliant, inspiring, intelligent film. And we were the only two out of at least several hundred movie-goers who had any interest in it. Conversely, the relatively mindless films such as Hangover II and Madea's... whatever... had plenty of viewers. Frankly I'm surprised that the theatre showed such a film as ours ... at all; very happily so, but considering it seemed to have such bad sales (and I live in a college town for fuck's sake), it probably won't show such films again. It just really depresses and bothers me what a vapid, anti-intellectual, egoistic, consumerist society we live in here in the United States.

Education and intellectualism are reviled in this culture. The American education system decays while it spends billions upon billions in foreign wars of aggression. Teachers and even university professors make meager money at best, while vapid entertainers roll in cash and fame. Even within the very institutions of education themselves, anti-intellectual sentiments are tolerated and ney, even promoted. Students showing too much interest in intellectual pursuits rather than the vapidity of pop culture are ostracized, harassed. Even in my own university experience - voluntary higher education at one of the more prestigious schools in the United States, I've noted that the vast majority of students here (around 80% or so I'd posit) are for more interested in trivial pointless matters than those of philosophy, intellectualism, improving themselves and the world around them. Students even are far more likely to discuss the latest football game, party, or girl/guy they banged than anything that expands and uplifts the mind. And in what is supposed to be an institution of learning and improvement, that is a bad, bad sign.

In the general population, it's drastically worse. Religious fundamentalism has such a hold of the population this backwards nation that even after more than a century of hard evidence on the matter, the majority of Americans do not accept evolution, show antipathy towards anyone lacking "perfectly straight" sexuality based on the dictates of some ancient scrolls. I don't mean to make a case against religion as a whole, as in many cases it can be quite uplifting to the human spirit: many sects of Buddhism and Liberation Theology come to mind. But religion as it has taken root in America seems, on aggregate to be very contrary to everything I have listed as separating humanity from other animals.

We live in an incredibly sick, decaying culture in the United States - and yet the majority of the population is content with such an existence. Everything that separates us from other animals, all that is human is rapidly being lost. Mindless hedonism is the virtue of the day. Consume consume consume. Party party party. Fuck fuck fuck. And don't get me wrong - there is certainly a place for such pleasures in life. But when higher virtues, our intelligence, our social progression are abandoned, then we lose a core part of our humanity.

And for all the pretenses of "freedom", "equality", and "democracy", we have precious little of any. There's an enormous wealth disparity in this nation, even more exacerbated when one brings race into the matter. And it's growing faster than ever.

Women are dehumanized and exploited in this society (saying nothing of the inequalities in pay/benefits/etc. in the financial sphere) - viewed as sexual objects to gratify a male's desires; instead of being seen as fellow, worthy human beings with all the same value and potential as any other. Unlike most in this society (from what I've observed at least), I actually have a great deal of respect for my girlfriend (and most all female members of the human species unless they've specifically done something to earn my scorn, for that matter). I see her yes as physically attractive, but beyond that an absolutely beautiful mind and personality. She's an amazingly intelligent person, and we've had absolutely intriguing conversations and all sorts of matters - most all of them far surpassing in value the worthless hedonism of this society. These things I value far above any physical matters. Yet our sick culture is such that women are under such pressure to conform to male's image of skin-deep "beauty" that many develop psychological trauma/starve themselves/otherwise harm themselves. That is a sick and dehumanizing culture, and I want zero part in it. And just the thought that this society would want to subject my girlfriend, my sisters, my female friends - or anyone for that matter to such a thing - for that I hate it.

Racial minorities are dehumanized and exploited. There is a strong correlation of poverty and race, and African Americans are far, far disproportionately incarcerated than any other ethnicity (the US prison system is also the largest both in total numbers and per capita of any nation on earth).

Many are discriminated against based upon their sexual orientation or religion (or lack thereof). I could go on and on, but the evidence should be self-evident to any who views the matter with a critical eye.

America's culture is one that despises all that sets humanity above other species of animals and loves that which robs us of our humanity. Just look to the popular media in this nation - Jersey Shore, Ke$ha, Paris Hilton, Britney Spears. Absolutely anti-intellectual, hedonistic, mindless drivel is elevated to a status of influence, and that which seeks to uplift humanity is scorned and marginalized. Even outside of the aggregious matters of its foreign policy and great injustices of its economic system, this is reason enough for me to absolutely detest the culture of the United States.

And obviously there are exceptions to this. I myself am a United States citizen (though not very proud of the fact honestly), and certainly wouldn't think myself falling into the mindset of the "average" American. Nor, would I posit, would most people on this site. The very fact that we're having a conversation on these matters demonstrates that we are rather separate from the rather "mainstream" culture of America. But those like myself, and I presume many of you, are rather marginalized and alienated in this culture in lieu of vapid hedonism and consumerism. And, I think in an objective reading of things, no other nation on earth has such a distorted, anti-intellectual, dehumanizing culture. Sadly though, many of the other nations on earth are importing this poison. *Sigh*





I guess then, switching gears. What draws me so much to the DPRK over any other communist nation is not so much its structure of government or economy per se, but its culture and philosophy. In Juche philosophy, society is seen as composed of the hammer, sickle, and paintbrush. The paintbrush, representing the intellectuals and artists is at the center, the forefront of society - and indeed, it is seen as being imperative that it must be there. Culturally then, the DPRK is almost as foreign from the US as one can get. There are no vapid, mindless celebrities. The heroes of society are the philosopher, the intellectual, the professor, the artist, the soldier. A society as it should be. Those viewed in high esteem in Juche are those who attempt to better themselves and mankind instead of stagnating in mindless hedonism. There is honor, humanity in such a culture. And that is what draws me to it.

Art, in its true, scientific and rational form - a sort that was lost in many ways in the West during the cultural destruction of the Industrial Revolution remains in the DPRK. Just listen to the absolute beauty of Mansudae - in many ways similar to the great western composers of old. And yes, there are forms of "modern" music that can be uplifting socially as well, I do not deny this; but it seems much of what is popular in the west focuses on vapid, rather than uplifting affairs.

And yes, I won't deny that the DPRK has had incredibly hard struggles. From before its formation indeed until the present, it has been engaged in a state of war with the United States - the highest funded military on earth. It has had trade sanctions placed upon it by most of the outside world. And indeed, because of such burdens, the people of this nation have suffered incredibly. But the people of North Korea have such a determination to endure, to fight through such suffering, to try to better themselves. And there's something beautifully human about that. Per capita, there is far less money to go around in the DPRK, but it has a government that actually cares about its people. There is universal healthcare, housing, and education (including post-secondary to those who choose such). The United States, a nation with so much more to go around, has none of these. And so when judging nations, I for one would certainly say that the nation who tries its best with what little it has is far better than the nation who does nothing for its own citizens despite the means to do so.

The DPRK has a government that actually cares about its people. Great Leader Kim Il Sung, when elected President of the entire nation would still humbly labor alongside the workers of his nation, learning from them, until his declining health in his late seventies made this impossible. He never dressed extravagantly or arrogantly as do the celebrities of this nation who earn their fame through vapid pursuits, instead dressing in a humble grey jacket. He was a man who lived and died by his motto "The people are my gods" (a motto I have made my own) - and risked and sacrificed more than most any for their sake. Such a man I would gladly follow, as I would know he had my best interests at stake.

What is there to be had in the United States but this farce of a democracy. Where every 4 years I can put a dot on a ballot beside the name of one of these worthless fuckers who all care far, far more for the interests of large corporations than those of the common person, whatever supposedly different "party" happens to be by their name. Who will make whatever promises are necessary to get elected then stab their own supporters in the back for corporate interests. This is no democracy, not in the true sense. This is a sick, dehumanizing society in every sense.

*Sigh* I guess I was just born too early or too late. Or at least in the wrong part of the world. But I long to live in a world where, to borrow from Plato, the philosophers and artists (in the true sense) are kings. And as far as I'm concerned, Juche seems like the closest thing to that we have in the modern world.

So hail the Great Leader, Eternal President Kim Il Sung, Suyrong, Lodestar of the Revolution! And death to all facets of culture that pervert and degrade humanity! Life to all that uplift, liberate and advance!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8hx78HDw8Jw

[Jusela]

I'm trying to find a way to argue against Tokyoni... But for some reason, I find myself actually agreeing with him this time, except for a few things regarding the DPRK.