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

[Laerod]

When a study puts the US at dead last for happiest, you know it's off. Americans love complaining, but not that much.

The point I was making is that ANY study conducted by a nation that puts itself as the top, by DEFAULT, is biased.

China, France, U.S., it doesn't matter.

Important questions to have: Why the fuck did they do this? What were they trying to accomplish with this?

Not necessarily. A study conducted in the US that discovered that it was on top when it came to the size of the economy wouldn't be discredited simply because the "host" was on top. It really depends on what the study is about. That said, any study that has any values regarding things you'd need surveys for and then contains values for regimes where public utterance of opinion is unlikely to happen... Yeah, the methodology would be instantly questionable.

[Demarlandia]

NorthCorea Resist the attacks of New World Order!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[The Rich Port]

This is pretty routine for the DPRK. They put out propaganda like this on a regular basis, largely for domestic reasons. I don't know much about the origin of the study, but "Chaoxian" is the Chinese term for "Chosun" which is what North Korea calls itself. So obviously this is some kind of Chinese-based front group. There are groups in Japan that serve a similar function.

Thing about propaganda is that it's supposed to sway things the way of the propagandist.

This survey isn't propaganda FOR China and North Korea as much as it is propaganda AGAINST China and North Korea.

Forget the people looking in from the outside, it's most insulting to the people inside: those hundreds of millions, possibly billions, of people saying "... Huh?"

[Zhugyu]

Probably trying to quell any civil unrest that there is and possibly prevent the democratic wave that hit the Middle East from hitting China by telling the people that they are happy.

... But how would this do that?

Living in the DPRK is, by all accounts of those who have escaped, like being brainwashed 24-7. As part of a broader campaign of repression, 'studies' like this are quite effective. As Goebbels put it, tell a lie often enough...

[Zhugyu]

This is pretty routine for the DPRK. They put out propaganda like this on a regular basis, largely for domestic reasons. I don't know much about the origin of the study, but "Chaoxian" is the Chinese term for "Chosun" which is what North Korea calls itself. So obviously this is some kind of Chinese-based front group. There are groups in Japan that serve a similar function.

Thing about propaganda is that it's supposed to sway things the way of the propagandist.

This survey isn't propaganda FOR China and North Korea as much as it is propaganda AGAINST China and North Korea.

Forget the people looking in from the outside, it's most insulting to the people inside: those hundreds of millions, possibly billions, of people saying "... Huh?"

If you've never known any other way of living, you may very well believe it. Ever hear of Stockholm Syndrome? Look at the devotion North Korean athletes and other public figures have toward the 'Dear Leader'. No doubt it's that class of people in North Korea that this sort of thing is intended for; everyone else is too busy trying to find food or avoid getting beaten in a labor camp.

[The Rich Port]

... But how would this do that?

Living in the DPRK is, by all accounts of those who have escaped, like being brainwashed 24-7. As part of a broader campaign of repression, 'studies' like this are quite effective. As Goebbels put it, tell a lie often enough...

Brainwashing isn't a 100% kinda thing.

Governments are never perfect, no matter what it does.

I understand how it would be difficult to start an anti-Juche movement within North Korea, but there's bound to be SOMETHING.

[Zhugyu]

Living in the DPRK is, by all accounts of those who have escaped, like being brainwashed 24-7. As part of a broader campaign of repression, 'studies' like this are quite effective. As Goebbels put it, tell a lie often enough...

Brainwashing isn't a 100% kinda thing.

Governments are never perfect, no matter what it does.

I understand how it would be difficult to start an anti-Juche movement within North Korea, but there's bound to be SOMETHING.

There are resistance movements, and defectors. I'm not saying everyone in North Korea buys into this. But there is a certain segment of the population which receives some kickbacks from the regime. It's these people this sort of thing is intended for. When you're not allowed to leave the country, and all news of the outside is heavily blocked and censored, and when you're subjected a 24-7 propaganda show from the moment you are born, it easy to see how some people might come to believe this, or fool themselves in believing it so they can survive. You can't look at the DPRK as if it were a normal society.

[The Rich Port]

Brainwashing isn't a 100% kinda thing.

Governments are never perfect, no matter what it does.

I understand how it would be difficult to start an anti-Juche movement within North Korea, but there's bound to be SOMETHING.

There are resistance movements, and defectors. I'm not saying everyone in North Korea buys into this. But there is a certain segment of the population which receives some kickbacks from the regime. It's these people this sort of thing is intended for. When you're not allowed to leave the country, and all news of the outside is heavily blocked and censored, and when you're subjected a 24-7 propaganda show from the moment you are born, it easy to see how some people might come to believe this, or fool themselves in believing it so they can survive. You can't look at the DPRK as if it were a normal society.

I dunno...

Hitler was totally right about his "big lie" theorem... Up until he shot himself when the Russians took Berlin.

Certainly, the method was rock-solid (the big lie), but the ethics were called into question by a number of his peers (the Allies).

Perhaps... The Juche... Will be... Deposed... By... The Juche?

I think I just backed myself into a logical corner.

[Pretty Awesome Persons]

Chaoxian.com.cn

Stopped reading there.

I'm pretty sure we can all agree that this is either:
-Propaganda
0r
-Fixed

[Wolny Kraj]

Communists propaganda... makes me sick.

they're NOT COMMUNIST

[The Rich Port]

Chaoxian.com.cn

Stopped reading there.

I'm pretty sure we can all agree that this is either:
-Propaganda
0r
-Fixed

Except for Tokyoni.

I like to think he's on a wild goose chase trying to find a study that says the U.S. is the happiest nation on Earth.

[Pretty Awesome Persons]

Stopped reading there.

I'm pretty sure we can all agree that this is either:
-Propaganda
0r
-Fixed

Except for Tokyoni.

I like to think he's on a wild goose chase trying to find a study that says the U.S. is the happiest nation on Earth.

Well, I wish him good luck.

I found one actually, pic related.

[Sibirsky]

You may be able to "just get over" the horrors perpetuated by the system for which you are so unabashed and irrational and apologist. I, however, am not fettered by such a willful moral bankruptcy.

You don't seem to have a problem supporting a system that has caused tens of millions of deaths. You are the unabashed and irrational apologist.

...Which serves the cause of global capitalism and neo-colonialism. Who cares where it gets its funding? It is the blunt instrument used by corporations and Western nations to economically brutalize the world.

Capitalist organizations are not meant to be taxpayer funded. They are privately owned.

That's it, Sibi. Just close your eyes, stop your ears, and say that over and over again and everything will be all right. It will magically become true and all of my arguments will disappear.

You ever fly on a plane? Before deregulation, it was extremely expensive, and not available to the masses. You obviously use a computer. It's not cost prohibitive to most. In fact computers and electronics are getting cheaper. Why? No ridiculous regulations to drive costs up. Maybe you can open your eyes and see reality.

It certainly does for cheap goods and funding for its debt. China is not the only nation exploited in this way, but it is certainly an increasingly vital part of a complex of exploitation upon which the West is, indeed, dependent.

Not really. Without it, the trade relationship would still exist.

Indeed they do, and I have observed as much in my points. The density is in the fact that you continue to fail to observe that those changes are, oftentimes, for the worse. Thriving, localized, eco-friendly, traditional economies are "changed" into ecologically devastated corporate sweatshop playgrounds.

There you go editing points out again. Dishonest. Most of the times, changes are for the better. You continue to ignore the massive income rises in China.

Yeah, I have already addressed that point but, since you are obviously a (ahem) selective reader I will indulge you: The USSR was prompted to damage its environment by desperation occassioned by its mistreatment at the hands of the West. Both Soviet and outside observers noted this state and affairs both at the time and in retrospect.

Source it.

Of course, you are still incorrect. Throughout the Cold War, the US was the largest producer of carbon emissions, the largest consumer of oil, the largest consumer of coal, the largest consumer of disposable goods (plastics, styrofoams), the largest producer of nuclear waste, and the largest user of aerosolized products (which destroy the ozone). This is, indeed, all still the case! Likewise, of course, the West does massive harm through its exploitation of other nations, forcing deforestation through the collapsing of local economies (forcing people to clear ancient, precious forests just to survive), allowing companies to strip-mine whole regions while forcing environmental deregulation throughout the third world.

Does it not make sense for the largest economy to be the largest consumer of oil, consumable goods etc?

So where does the impetus for growth come from? Supply and demand are too closely related for your sort of infantile "one causes the other" platitudes. Consumer spending is an accepted standard of the state of an economy and prompting it has been a policy imperative in Capitalist countries for centuries.

People can save and invest. Investment creates economic growth, income rises and creates jobs. Then people spend.

1)Just one interesting case of teacher regulations causing controversy: http://www.lvrj.com/news/37788029.html
Some of these statutes are indeed being cleared away, only to be replaced by less legislative forms of pressure. Recently, a lecturer in Labor Studies was forced to resign after being smeared in the national media daring to teach about violence as a labor rights tactic in one of his classes. http://leiterreports.typepad.com/blog/2 ... louis.html

2) Not so meaningless that people don't make cases out of it.

1) Considering we have Marxists teaching at UMass and other institutions I don't think it's as big a deal as you make it out to be.
2) People make cases out of the smallest things. You give me garbage for grammar, for example.

....what?

You said...

I could care less whether you think you support them. The fact is, you support the system (indeed, you are a fanatical, droning, apologist for it) and, ergo, you support its acts of aggression.

Ergo, you support it's acts of aggression. I'm one of the biggest anti-war posters you'll find on the forum. Using your own logic, since you support socialism, that means you support their acts of aggression and their mass murders of their own people (genocide).

No, there wasn't. The European powers, by and large, supported what was left of the White Russians in an effort to undermine the new state. The US did not even engage in anything like large scale trade until FDR's administration, and even that was on a highly limited basis (and met with heavy opposition). The USSR, for its part, sought trade wherever it could find it.

Yes there was. There was little of it, like I said, because they pursued a policy of self-sufficiency. There was however, even trade with the US.

But there was only one main good being sold by the West and that was opium. Point, set, match. Thanks for playing.

Not the only thing they sold. Knockout.

...The Canton System caused the decline of China because and only because the West didn't like that system's restriction of their drug trade and, as a result, proceeded to carve up the country.

They didn't like the restriction of most trade, and it helped the collapse on it's own. If the west just took it, and went home, the Middle Kingdom would still decline.

Yes, because Mao's regime was given the utmost support from the start. Oh, wait. Like every other viable alternative to Capitalism, it was attacked by the West from the word "go." Trade restrictions, saber-rattling, sabotage, support of enemies, the usual tricks of the neo-colonialist trade.

Obviously none of it is Mao's fault. The Great Leap Forward was a Western idea.

What are you babbling about?

You're the one babbling. If it's bad, the capitalist west did it. Socialists do no wrong! That's the basic summary of your posts.

Environmental crisis? What environmental crisis?

Sibi, you are living in a denialist fantasy land. Shouldn't you be off with your tea part friends throwing bricks through a democratic congressman's windows or something?

We do not know what's causing it. Perhaps you are aware of the five major ice ages we've had? With warmer periods in between? Weather changes.

You're the one living in denial and fantasy land. You're not online at this moment. I guess you're throwing bricks through banks and the local McDonald's.

"Trade in everything" is a bit misleading given that all the West was selling were drugs. So you admit to supporting drug dealers. How, pray, do you sleep at night? Drugs are a product that kills people, ruins lives, and created dependency and you see no problem with it.

It was not the only thing they sold.

I believe people should have the right to do as they wish, as long as they don't harm others. Legalizing drugs would bring them out of the black market. Quality could be assured, violence would go down, and freedoms would increase. There are many products that create dependency and ruin lives. Doesn't mean we should ban them. Further, treatment is cheaper than addiction, and legalization lowers use.

You support a "free nation" that has 5% of the world's population jailing 25% of the world's prisoners. Almost half of which are in there for drugs violations. A good number of those, for nothing more than possession. The damage from the war on drugs us far worse than the drugs themselves. And you support it. How do you sleep at night?

As for theft, the Canton system restricted Western movement within Chinese borders. This made sense as a means of keeping Westerners from stealing valuables from China (as, indeed, they had before and as, indeed, they would once the interior of China became accessible).

Does that happen now? On a massive scale?

[Jericho Republic]

Well, I wish him good luck.

I found one actually, pic related.

([url=http://img30.imageshack.us/img30/3141/usausausausa.jpg]Image)[/url]

Why do I sense that this was edited by someone?

[Demen]

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

...

Please god let this be sarcasm...

[Zhugyu]

There are resistance movements, and defectors. I'm not saying everyone in North Korea buys into this. But there is a certain segment of the population which receives some kickbacks from the regime. It's these people this sort of thing is intended for. When you're not allowed to leave the country, and all news of the outside is heavily blocked and censored, and when you're subjected a 24-7 propaganda show from the moment you are born, it easy to see how some people might come to believe this, or fool themselves in believing it so they can survive. You can't look at the DPRK as if it were a normal society.

I dunno...

Hitler was totally right about his "big lie" theorem... Up until he shot himself when the Russians took Berlin.

Certainly, the method was rock-solid (the big lie), but the ethics were called into question by a number of his peers (the Allies).

Perhaps... The Juche... Will be... Deposed... By... The Juche?

I think I just backed myself into a logical corner.

That's precisely the point, though. The Nazis were ultimately defeated by an external force, not an internal uprising. Did the "big lie" work on all Germans under the Third Reich? No, but it worked on enough of them. You're looking at this as though there is some sort of "debate" within North Korean society about the viability of the Juche Idea, i.e. as though North Korean society were normal. There is no debate because North Korea isn't a normal society, it's a totalitarian one, and the dynamics of totalitarianism are so completely far removed from your assumptions. The purpose of this 'study' is not to convince anyone of the superiority of an ideology. It's to stop North Koreans from thinking and asking questions. It's one strand out of a tapestry of state-run media designed to hypnotize and suppress. Working in tandem with the other policies of the state, it's working, because the DPRK is still here and its leadership is just as psychotic as it was 20 years ago. The DPRK is not simple another dictatorship, like,say, Mubarak's Egypt. It's in a class all its own.

And in terms of sheer totalitarianism, the DPRK has a tighter control over its population than Hitler ever had on his. That's not to say all North Koreans believe the propaganda, but again, when most of them are too busy trying to secure enough food to survive or enduring the horrors of forced labor camps, it is very difficult to build an effective or widespread resistance movement.

[Norstal]

NorthCorea Resist the attacks of New World Order!!!!!!!!!!!!!

(Image)

"NO YOU FOOLS, THE OTHER WAY!"

[Hallistar]

NorthCorea Resist the attacks of New World Order!!!!!!!!!!!!!

(Image)

"NO YOU FOOLS, THE OTHER WAY!"

[The Rich Port]

NorthCorea Resist the attacks of New World Order!!!!!!!!!!!!!

(Image)

"NO YOU FOOLS, THE OTHER WAY!"

Norstal made a funny.

[SaintB]

Communists propaganda... makes me sick.

No its Juche propaganda. Capitalist propaganda made you think its Communist propaganda.

Juche propaganda is best propaganda.

[Islamic Hazarastan]

Anti-NK circlejerk >_<

[Andaluciae]

Anti-NK circlejerk >_<

That's what happens when the universal consensus on the DPRK is that it's social development has been comically left behind, it's economic policy has proven to be uncomically murderous, oh, and the leadership is insane and repressive--not to mention centered around the worship of a dead god-king.

[Zhugyu]

Anti-NK circlejerk >_<

That's what happens when the universal consensus on the DPRK is that it's social development has been comically left behind, it's economic policy has proven to be uncomically murderous, oh, and the leadership is insane and repressive--not to mention centered around the worship of a dead god-king.

Yeah, there's really nothing good to say about the DPRK at all. This has nothing to do with political beliefs, any reasonable, sane person who has any kind of compassion for their fellow human beings is anti-DPRK.

[Outer Chaosmosis]

ote]
You don't seem to have a problem supporting a system that has caused tens of millions of deaths. You are the unabashed and irrational apologist.

Translation: "I know you are, but what am I?"

Your pathetic name-calling aside, you have, of course, failed to demonstrate that socialism has caused tens of millions of deaths.

Capitalist organizations are not meant to be taxpayer funded. They are privately owned.

Again, who cares who owns it? The organization furthers the cause of global capitalism and neo-colonialism.

You ever fly on a plane? Before deregulation, it was extremely expensive, and not available to the masses. You obviously use a computer. It's not cost prohibitive to most. In fact computers and electronics are getting cheaper. Why? No ridiculous regulations to drive costs up. Maybe you can open your eyes and see reality.

There you go again, mistaking correlation for causation. You should dive back into whatever CrackerJack box you fished your "education" out of and brush up on your argumentative reasoning skills because, as is, you use faulty reasoning in virtually every line of your posts.

Air travel and computers are still not available to "the masses." A third of the people on this planet cannot even afford the basic necessities of life, let alone things like air travel. The reason air travel and computers are attainable by some is, principally, because of the horrific exploitation of others: exploitation you defend and, indeed, celebrate.

Not really. Without it, the trade relationship would still exist.

Absurd. The "relationship" would be nothing like what it is today because the US economy would be in shambles.

Most of the times, changes are for the better.

You have, of course, done nothing to demonstrate. Massive global poverty, environmental destruction, and inequality all speak to the contrary.

Source it.

See, for instances, Figes' Natasha's Dance, or Kotkin's Magnetic Mountain for discussions of the reasoning behind Soviet industrial policy (and its environmental consequences). Stalin himself viewed rapid modernization as necessary for the survival of the state, saying in an address to the party in the 1930s that the West had industrialized over the course of a century with the assistance of numerous colonial possessions, while the Soviet Union, in order to survive, had to industrialize in the course of a decade lest it be crushed by these hostile powers. History proved this concern to be, of course, completely founded.

Does it not make sense for the largest economy to be the largest consumer of oil, consumable goods etc?

1) The consumption is entirely out of proportion to the population.

2) This very question demonstrates the sickness of the Capitalist perspective: the strength of an economy is measured by how wasteful and destructive it is, and that waste and destruction is (in a circular gesture worthy of your own fantastic illogic) is then justified by the "strength" of the economy!

People can save and invest. Investment creates economic growth, income rises and creates jobs. Then people spend.

The problem with this is that people do not get the choice as to whether their savings or investments create jobs because, in the end, they do not control where the money they save or invest actually goes. People can pour all the money they wish into banks, but if those same banks are not loaning money (due to, oh, say, lack of spending and profits ) then no jobs get created by those efforts.

Likewise, of course, with no money to save/invest, the point is moot and that money, in turn, comes from spending.

1) Considering we have Marxists teaching at UMass and other institutions I don't think it's as big a deal as you make it out to be.

The facts say otherwise. Persecution is a problem, even at these institutions. It is only through the courage of administrations willing to resist that persecution that such faculties are able to form (even amidst the howling and protests).

Furthermore, of course, colleges are, as a rule, more difficult to regulate than other schools. You will find, in particular, that public high schools are still very cautious with respect to the subject of communism.

2) People make cases out of the smallest things. You give me garbage for grammar, for example.

Small things? Cases involving the pledge have made it to the supreme court on a number of occasions. Your ignorance of these things is astonishing.

As for your grammar, I do not think it is too much to ask that you be competent in the language in which you chose to debate.

Ergo, you support it's acts of aggression.

Care to explain this bizarre claim?

Anyway, the system I am defending does not engage in acts of aggression but, rather, in reactions to the aggression of others (which I have demonstrated with extensive historical examples).

Yes there was. There was little of it, like I said, because they pursued a policy of self-sufficiency. There was however, even trade with the US.

As I said, the US did not trade with the USSR until FDR, and, prior to that, there was virtually no trade with the nations of the West. The policy of self-sufficiency was in response to this state of affairs.

Not the only thing they sold.

Nor did I claim it was. It was, however, the main thing it sold (as it was how the West gained access to valuable Chinese tea).

They didn't like the restriction of most trade, and it helped the collapse on it's own.

But it didn't collapse on its own. It was attacked and victimized by the West in a series of bloody wars.

If the west just took it, and went home, the Middle Kingdom would still decline.

You, of course, have no support for this ridiculous, counterfactual claim.

Obviously none of it is Mao's fault. The Great Leap Forward was a Western idea.

It was a response to the West, yes. For the reasons I have already explained at length and which you have done nothing to refute.

We do not know what's causing it. Perhaps you are aware of the five major ice ages we've had? With warmer periods in between? Weather changes.

Actually, there is a fairly large scientific consensus that global warming is caused by humans. Even if there was not, however, you still have failed utterly to address the many other obviously human caused environmental problems besetting this planet: pollution, medicine-resistant diseases, the Ozone hole.

You're the one living in denial and fantasy land. You're not online at this moment. I guess you're throwing bricks through banks and the local McDonald's.

"I know you are, but what am I?"

Keep posting, Sibi. Your absurdity shows the absurdity of your cause easily as well as my own criticisms.

I believe people should have the right to do as they wish, as long as they don't harm others. Legalizing drugs would bring them out of the black market. Quality could be assured, violence would go down, and freedoms would increase. There are many products that create dependency and ruin lives. Doesn't mean we should ban them. Further, treatment is cheaper than addiction, and legalization lowers use.

I don't care what you believe. The point is, you don't get to make that choice for China or its people. The West robbed China of the ability even to make that decision for itself, forcing a horrors of the drug trade upon them at the point of a gun and crippling the country by inches for centuries after.

And you support it. How do you sleep at night?

Please show me where I expressed any support for the American War on drugs.

Does that happen now? On a massive scale?

1) Yes, in the sense that the whole of the nation is now an exploited dependent of the West.

2) What does it matter if it happens now? The point is that the Chinese were concerned about theft and they had every right to be. Indeed, after the Opium wars opened up China, the very theft they feared came to pass.

[Sibirsky]

ote]
You don't seem to have a problem supporting a system that has caused tens of millions of deaths. You are the unabashed and irrational apologist.

Translation: "I know you are, but what am I?"

Your pathetic name-calling aside, you have, of course, failed to demonstrate that socialism has caused tens of millions of deaths.

Pathetic name calling? I used your line, word for word. I need to demonstrate the blatantly obvious? Mao, Stalin, Lenin, Ho Chi Minh, Kim Il-Sung, Pol Pot, Kim Jong-Il. Failed to demonstrate only in your revisionist book.

Again, who cares who owns it? The organization furthers the cause of global capitalism and neo-colonialism.

It's a corrupt, government organization, that most nations are members of.

There you go again, mistaking correlation for causation. You should dive back into whatever CrackerJack box you fished your "education" out of and brush up on your argumentative reasoning skills because, as is, you use faulty reasoning in virtually every line of your posts.

Air travel and computers are still not available to "the masses." A third of the people on this planet cannot even afford the basic necessities of life, let alone things like air travel. The reason air travel and computers are attainable by some is, principally, because of the horrific exploitation of others: exploitation you defend and, indeed, celebrate.

You should watch the flamebaiting.

After deregulation, prices dropped. Airlines competed, partially on price. Competition, which did not exist prior to deregulation, lowers prices. I know this is a difficult concept for you to understand, but it's true. The reason being is, by selling cheaper, they can sell more, and make up profits through volume and market share. It's available to the masses in the first world, because of the wealth those societies generate, through their free economies, and through free trade. They trade what they have, for what they want, and both parties benefit.

What exploitation? This is the most ridiculous argument. Wealth, is not a zero sum game. How in the world is the entire world getting richer? At who's exploitation? How are nearly all nations getting richer? You make no sense. This is a bullshit argument. How much bullshit? If the United States was able to invade, simultaneously, the smallest 106 nations, and confiscate the product of their labor, over an entire year, that could power the US economy for a month.

You celebrate the death and poverty of tens of millions.

Absurd. The "relationship" would be nothing like what it is today because the US economy would be in shambles.

Really? Trade did not start on a massive scale until the late 70s. Prior to the 70s, the US economy was far from being "in shambles." Why don't you actually learn what you're talking about before making a fool of yourself in debates. The US exports $84 billion to China, and imports $367 billion from China. In a $15,069 billion economy. It's significant of course, but it does not mean the economy would be in shambles without it.

You have, of course, done nothing to demonstrate. Massive global poverty, environmental destruction, and inequality all speak to the contrary.

The massive global poverty is caused by your economic system, corruption, wars etc. Capitalism has a history of wealth creation. 300 years of growth and prosperity for the masses that adopt the system. Growing together, not at the expense of one another as you continue to whine about.

See, for instances, Figes' Natasha's Dance, or Kotkin's Magnetic Mountain for discussions of the reasoning behind Soviet industrial policy (and its environmental consequences). Stalin himself viewed rapid modernization as necessary for the survival of the state, saying in an address to the party in the 1930s that the West had industrialized over the course of a century with the assistance of numerous colonial possessions, while the Soviet Union, in order to survive, had to industrialize in the course of a decade lest it be crushed by these hostile powers. History proved this concern to be, of course, completely founded.

Stalin was a madman that killed the leadership of his army right before World War II. Not to mention all the atrocities committed against the military during World War II. And to the civilians throughout their time. Regardless, environmental damage continued well after Stalin's death.

1) The consumption is entirely out of proportion to the population.

I said largest economy, not population.

2) This very question demonstrates the sickness of the Capitalist perspective: the strength of an economy is measured by how wasteful and destructive it is, and that waste and destruction is (in a circular gesture worthy of your own fantastic illogic) is then justified by the "strength" of the economy!

Did I say that? The waste is inefficient. The joke of a system you support (USSR) produced more steel, and more cement than the United States. Yet it produced less products from that steel and cement. That is waste. That is destruction. Mainly of the standard of living.

I measure an economy by it's overall size, not waste or energy use.

The problem with this is that people do not get the choice as to whether their savings or investments create jobs because, in the end, they do not control where the money they save or invest actually goes. People can pour all the money they wish into banks, but if those same banks are not loaning money (due to, oh, say, lack of spending and profits ) then no jobs get created by those efforts.

Likewise, of course, with no money to save/invest, the point is moot and that money, in turn, comes from spending.

Yourself. Is it that difficult to you to think one step ahead?

People save. Savings is deferring present consumption for the future. Savings also lower interest rates. That makes long term investment more attractive as interests rates are low, and demand has been pushed back into the future. This creates jobs, and demand, both in the present and the future.

The facts say otherwise. Persecution is a problem, even at these institutions. It is only through the courage of administrations willing to resist that persecution that such faculties are able to form (even amidst the howling and protests).

Furthermore, of course, colleges are, as a rule, more difficult to regulate than other schools. You will find, in particular, that public high schools are still very cautious with respect to the subject of communism.

They exist though.

Small things? Cases involving the pledge have made it to the supreme court on a number of occasions. Your ignorance of these things is astonishing.

As for your grammar, I do not think it is too much to ask that you be competent in the language in which you chose to debate.

I wasn't talking about the pledge. I was talking about things in general.

Do you understand what I'm typing? Is my grammar the reason you don't or is it your religion? Ah... grammar is irrelevant.

Care to explain this bizarre claim?

Anyway, the system I am defending does not engage in acts of aggression but, rather, in reactions to the aggression of others (which I have demonstrated with extensive historical examples).

That's your claim. You claim that I support acts of the west's aggression and exploitation of the third world. Using your very own, corrupt logic, you support mass poverty and genocide.

The Soviet Union was not endangered by events in Hungary or Czechoslovakia. And they crushed the revolution. The Soviet military was all over the place. And they violently crushed the resistance.

As I said, the US did not trade with the USSR until FDR, and, prior to that, there was virtually no trade with the nations of the West. The policy of self-sufficiency was in response to this state of affairs.

No, it was one of the goals. They traded only out of necessity.

Nor did I claim it was. It was, however, the main thing it sold (as it was how the West gained access to valuable Chinese tea).

Ok. But trade was restricted to all items. Not just opium.

But it didn't collapse on its own. It was attacked and victimized by the West in a series of bloody wars.

I think you misunderstand. If the west just said "well screw it, we're not trading with China then," and went home, China would still have declined. It may have taken longer, but keep in mind that China was wealthier than Europe, prior to the Canton System.

You, of course, have no support for this ridiculous, counterfactual claim.

The support of the claim comes from the fact, that through trade both parties benefit. Without trade, there is no benefit. Reclusive nations have never faired well. That includes China, the USSR, North Korea and so on. Free trade is a benefit. And China cut it off.

It was a response to the West, yes. For the reasons I have already explained at length and which you have done nothing to refute.

There is nothing to refute. The claim is fiction. Mao was opposed internally. Khruschev revealed Stalin's massive crimes and errors during collectivization and Mao's opposition strengthened. Not from the west, but from inside. Not only that, Mao was warned of the massive unintended consequences his policies were having and he went forward with them anyway. That's murder.

Actually, there is a fairly large scientific consensus that global warming is caused by humans. Even if there was not, however, you still have failed utterly to address the many other obviously human caused environmental problems besetting this planet: pollution, medicine-resistant diseases, the Ozone hole.

Yeah that shit sucks. What do you propose, we go back several hundred years and live in caves? How dare you use a computer and the internet? The computer is made from plastic and metal, and we get most of our electricity from fossil fuels. Bad for the environment.

"I know you are, but what am I?"

Keep posting, Sibi. Your absurdity shows the absurdity of your cause easily as well as my own criticisms.

Every single one of those, was started by you.

I don't care what you believe. The point is, you don't get to make that choice for China or its people. The West robbed China of the ability even to make that decision for itself, forcing a horrors of the drug trade upon them at the point of a gun and crippling the country by inches for centuries after.

They made their decision and it backfired.

Please show me where I expressed any support for the American War on drugs.

You asked me how I sleep at night because I said drug dealers merely sell a product, after going on a mini tirade about the horrors their product causes.

1) Yes, in the sense that the whole of the nation is now an exploited dependent of the West.

2) What does it matter if it happens now? The point is that the Chinese were concerned about theft and they had every right to be. Indeed, after the Opium wars opened up China, the very theft they feared came to pass.

1) Wrong. The relationship is mutually beneficial.
2) It's been 150 years.