Would you like to emmigrate to the DPRK?

Quote:

I'm talking about the long-term track record that developed capitalist economies have over socialist economies.

That's only in your head. Soviet production capacity was much stronger than Nazi production at the end of the war, even though Nazi Germany was a strong developed capitalist country. In the 1950's US scholars believed that the USSR would overtake the United States in the 1970's. So during most of its existence, the USSR had a stronger growth than the capitalist countries. If you take two different countries who started with the same development and population, China and India, it's clear that China has both a better HDI and a better growth. So no matter how you take it, history has proven the superiority of socialism over capitalism. The failure of the USSR isn't due to socialism itself, but to the fact that socialism started in backward countries or countries which suffered many destruction.

Quote:

And this brings me to another question for you. If the South's economic success is founded mainly on the US, how come it took until the 1970s for it to surpass the DPRK? Why didn't the Americans "build" the South Korean economy in the 1950s?

The Americans had already much to build, in Japan and in Europe with the Marshall Plan. In the 1970's Soviet economy declines, and North Korea's growth declined as a consequence.

Quote:

You didn't say it, I just extended your logic to that particular issue. By your logic, the proletariat have no right to revolt (and therefore shouldn't).

This conclusion has nothing to do with logic. You can't extend "my logic" with illogical statements. Having no right to revolt doesn't mean that you shouldn't revolt. If you want to "extend my logic", at least do it with logical statements, or try to explain how you come to such conlusions... if you can.

Quote:

An absolutist monarchy has no bourgeois parties and is therefore (under your logic) a democracy.

Once again that's not logical. You really have a problem with logic, reason and philosophy. I said that a country ruled by bourgeois parties can't be called a democracy. How do you come to the conclusion that a country is a democracy "because it has no bourgeois parties"?

If I say that a fruit with a kernel can't be called a banana, does it mean that every fruit without kernels are bananas ??

Quote:

Really? Its just had its wrist slapped by China and is reliant on food handouts from bourgeois international organisations. And South Korea clearly benefits from its relations with the US and other countries (including China) as is shown by its vastly superior living standards compared with North Korea.

North Korea has proven that the country can survive without allies and despite famines in the 1990s. The present situations shows that North Koreans are free to adopt the foreign policy they want. There is no Chinese or Russian military base in North Korea. That's the difference between a puppet and a free state.

I have a dog, I give him food and he is happy. Maybe that's a good deal for him, but it doesn't matter since he's my dog. The USA also have a dog called South Korea.

Quote:

Whereas you seem to be pro-poverty. So long as people have "honour." Who gives a frag about honour when you're hungry, poor and don't have access to medicines? The whole point of socialism is it supposed to lead to improved material conditions for the working class. If South Korea's working class living under capitalism have a far superior standard of living than socialist North Korea, we can only assume that the socialism in North Korea isn't working. Since it isn't actually socialism but a weird type of quas-feudalism, this is hardly surprising.

Since you have a problem with logic you can't understand that isolation itself, and not socialism, is sufficient to precipitate any country, including South Korea, in the situation of the North. If tomorrow a war is waged against the South, and the South is isolated from its allies, the country would moulder, especially since its economy is based on exports.

And no, I'm not pro-poverty, I'm communist. I defend communism against its enemies, in opulence as in poverty, in war as in peace, in victory or defeat.

Quote:

http://www.korean-war.com/Archives/2002 ... 00354.html

http://www.wilsoncenter.org/sites/defau ... 5_p4_0.pdf

That's not what I call a citation. I can't comment a whole pamphlet.

Quote:

That's only in your head. Soviet production capacity was much stronger than Nazi production at the end of the war, even though Nazi Germany was a strong developed capitalist country.

These are skewed examples as these were both war economies currently operating along a basis of total war. Plus by the end of the war Nazi Germany had had its factories bombed to shit while the USSR had managed to relocate much of its industry beyond the reach of the Luftwaffe.

Quote:

In the 1950's US scholars believed that the USSR would overtake the United States in the 1970's.

And they were wrong.

Quote:

So during most of its existence, the USSR had a stronger growth than the capitalist countries.

Developing countries often have a higher rate of growth than developed countries. The Cambodian economy is currently growing faster than the US economy.

http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.KD.ZG

Quote:

If you take two different countries who started with the same development and population, China and India, it's clear that China has both a better HDI and a better growth.

India employed very socialist economic policies up until 1991 when it begun implementing capitalist reforms. China started implementing capitalist reforms in 1978. China has beaten India in terms of economic growth due to its capitalism, not its socialism.

Quote:

So no matter how you take it, history has proven the superiority of socialism over capitalism.

No it hasn't. All the "socialist" countries have either collapsed or reformed into capitalism. Only North Korea is left and they live in abject poverty. However, since none of these countries were ever genuinely socialist (the working class never exercised political or economic power), this was hardly the fault of genuine socialism.

Quote:

The failure of the USSR isn't due to socialism itself, but to the fact that socialism started in backward countries or countries which suffered many destruction.

I agree on the first one (backward countries), but as I said above, also because it was not proper socialism.

Quote:

The Americans had already much to build, in Japan and in Europe with the Marshall Plan. In the 1970's Soviet economy declines, and North Korea's growth declined as a consequence.

So North Korea was hardly independent then

If you knew anything about the postwar history of Asia, the development of the South Korean economy was part of a region-wide pattern called the Asian Tigers. which included Malaysia, Singapore, Taiwan and Hong Kong. Are you saying that all these countries owe their economic growth purely due to US aid? Bullshit. They have developed thanks to utilising capitalist policies combined with increasingly literate workforces and adapting to global economic conditions and practices. Capitalism by its very nature provides large amounts of economic growth and revolutionises society. That's why Marx respected it so much.

Quote:

This conclusion has nothing to do with logic. You can't extend "my logic" with illogical statements. Having no right to revolt doesn't mean that you shouldn't revolt. If you want to "extend my logic", at least do it with logical statements, or try to explain how you come to such conlusions... if you can.

You said:

'There is formal rights and real rights. If someone has no formal rights, he has no formal rights. If someone has no real rights, he has no real rights. This doesn't depend on your own judgment. On this board for example, you have no formal right to make one line posts, but since there is a relative tolerance, you have a real right, but limited, to make one line posts. That you agree or not with those limitations of freedom, and decide or not to abide by that, has nothing to do with the existence of such rights.'

I.e. formal rights are the rights those people in power grant you in name and real rights are what those in power grant you in practice. Obviously the bourgeoisie does not give us a right, either formal or real, to overthrow capitalism. However, since those rights only exist in people's minds, if we overthrow capitalism they become utterly irrelevant and meaningless. So when you originally said 'Someone who didn't stood firm to his principles has no honor, someone who has no right has no right.' it was bullshit because, irregardless of whether he has a right to do something or not, he can still do it. Thus any perceptions of his "rights" are purely subjective and become irrelevant once the act is done.

Quote:

North Korea has proven that the country can survive without allies and despite famines in the 1990s.

The fact it had famines and South Korea did not is indicative of how much more successful the South Korea economy is. And it eventually asked for handouts from aid agencies, South Korea and the US (some "communist honour" )

Quote:

The present situations shows that North Koreans are free to adopt the foreign policy they want.

Then why has China just slapped their wrist for all the recent sabre-rattling its been doing?

Quote:

There is no Chinese or Russian military base in North Korea. That's the difference between a puppet and a free state.

Seriously? THAT's your definition? There are US military bases in the UK and no-one feels any influence from them. If you ask a group of people whether they would like to live in an eocnomy as prosperous as South Korea's but have a few US military bases there, or live in a country as poor as North Korea's but have no US bases, I bet they would pick South Korea any day.

Quote:

Since you have a problem with logic you can't understand that isolation itself, and not socialism, is sufficient to precipitate any country, including South Korea, in the situation of the North. If tomorrow a war is waged against the South, and the South is isolated from its allies, the country would moulder, especially since its economy is based on exports.

But North Korea is not currently involved in any active war. It sells exports to China, Russia and other countries (India). I agree that sanctions really don't help it but you cannot blame this alone. It's inefficient state-dominated economic policies cause a lot of the problems.

Quote:

And no, I'm not pro-poverty, I'm communist. I defend communism against its enemies, in opulence as in poverty, in war as in peace, in victory or defeat.

Are you aware that in North Korea's last constitutional revision (2009), it finally deleted all mentions of Marxism, Leninism and Communism?

Quote:

That's not what I call a citation. I can't comment a whole pamphlet.

Then I suggest you go to Moscow and look at the archives.

Not to further derail this thread, but the U.K. isn't so much the lapdog as the doting mother of the U.S. After all, Britain very consciously handed over the role of imperialist hegemon to the U.S. following WWII.

Quote:

India employed very socialist economic policies up until 1991 when it begun implementing capitalist reforms. China started implementing capitalist reforms in 1978. China has beaten India in terms of economic growth due to its capitalism, not its socialism.

Has Amarty Sen has proved, the Chinese economy was already better before 1978 thanks to socialist policies.

Quote:

And they were wrong.

No they were right. The USSR would have done so if there hadn't been an economic downturn due, for example, to agricultural crisis and the growth in weapon production.

Quote:

No it hasn't. All the "socialist" countries have either collapsed or reformed into capitalism. Only North Korea is left and they live in abject poverty.

Cuba is still alive and has a better HDI than the USA. Cubans are more educated and in a better health condition.

Quote:

So North Korea was hardly independent then

Trading doesn't mean that you are not independant. You confuse independance and isolation. An independant country is a country that is ruling according to its own wishes. Economy is important for independance, but since North Korea survived the breakdown of the USSR, it's quite clear that North Korea was, indeed, economically independant.

Quote:

That's why Marx respected it so much.

OMG, Marx struggled against capitalism. You are trying to transform Marx into a petty bourgeois to justify your own vacillations.

Quote:

irregardless of whether he has a right to do something or not, he can still do it

- Not if he has no concrete, real right.
- Not if "still doing it" implies a punishment as a consequence.
Thus right isn't "metaphysical" as you said, right is a reality: ideological, or political reality (formal right), concrete reality (real right).

Quote:

The fact it had famines and South Korea did not is indicative of how much more successful the South Korea economy is.

No, the climate isn't the same. Your are obviously not strong in dialectics.

Quote:

Then why has China just slapped their wrist for all the recent sabre-rattling its been doing?

Slapped their wrist? If China had done something like that, they would have taken a nuke on the head.

Quote:

Seriously? THAT's your definition? There are US military bases in the UK and no-one feels any influence from them.

Of course since you are not a Communist. Something like that would be shameful in France. Entering back into NATO is already shameful, but having US bases would be worst.

Quote:

If you ask a group of people whether they would like to live in an eocnomy as prosperous as South Korea's but have a few US military bases there, or live in a country as poor as North Korea's but have no US bases, I bet they would pick South Korea any day.

Who would say that? Not a Communist.

Quote:

It's inefficient state-dominated economic policies cause a lot of the problems.

70% percent of the Chinese economy is state-dominated. The only "problem" with North Korea is that it refuses to open itself to foreign investment, but this problem is also ist strength.

Quote:

Are you aware that in North Korea's last constitutional revision (2009), it finally deleted all mentions of Marxism, Leninism and Communism?

And did they also deleted all mentions to Kim Il Sung ? No ? Because he was a Marxist and a Communist. Maybe not the best one, but he was.

OP-Bagration wrote:

Yes, that's why we must ban bourgeois parties. A bourgeois party never says it is bourgeois.

I see, it's you who decide about burgeoisness of some party.

OP-Bagration wrote:

In a true democracy you don't need opposition but discussion.

And what happens if one group disagrees with you? You proclaim them burgeoise and put them to jail?

OP-Bagration wrote:

Democracy = power of the people.

So, how come DPRK is a democracy if Kim Fat One is in command and there were no elections in which your "people" would elect him to lead them?
You need to seriously re-think your world-view, pedro....

Quote:

I see, it's you who decide about burgeoisness of some party.

Nobody "decide" of truth. Truth is objective, you can only describe it.

Quote:

And what happens if one group disagrees with you? You proclaim them burgeoise and put them to jail?

Why putting my friends in jail?
If that was true you would be dead already, and there would be Gred's blood all over the place.

Quote:

So, how come DPRK is a democracy if Kim Fat One is in command and there were no elections in which your "people" would elect him to lead them?
You need to seriously re-think your world-view, pedro....

Pedro??? As Lenin said, proletarian democracy isn't incompatible with the dictatorship of one man. As long as my fat friend represents the power of the Korean people, its interest as a people, the interest of the workers above all and their will to resist the southern puppet, then indeed North Korea is one hundred times more democratic than the South whose leadership represent only the power of the Korean bourgeoisie and of its American masters.

OP-Bagration wrote:

Nobody "decide" of truth. Truth is objective, you can only describe it.

But you just said that a certain group who you label burgeoise would disagree with this. So how would you resolve the issue unless you'd have to take a decision? Catch 22.

OP-Bagration wrote:

Why putting my friends in jail?

THat's *exactly* it! You nailed it! You only want to have friends in your "dream" state. So you'd get rid of all those people who would disagree with you openly.

OP-Bagration wrote:

As long as my fat friend represents the power of the Korean people, its interest as a people, the interest of the workers above all and their will to resist the southern puppet, then indeed North Korea is one hundred times more democratic than the South whose leadership represent only the power of the Korean bourgeoisie and of its American masters.

Since when Kim Fat One actually REPRESENTS the North Korean people with their consent? Since NEVER. Since when does he serve their own interests by starving them to build a useless dud of a nuke? Since NEVER! But, as you claim, above all that is the importance of resisting the Southern puppet... and only a fat pig like him can effectively resist them? What a joke. You must be an adolescent.

Quote:

I dont' want to derail this thread... but really? REALLY?
The UK has been the lapdog of the US for decades...

Having a few foreign military bases doesn't determine whether a country is under the domination of another. The UK could have no US bases on its soil but still be under the US sphere of unfluence. And no, those bases have almost no impact on the people who actually live here.

Quote:

Has Amarty Sen has proved, the Chinese economy was already better before 1978 thanks to socialist policies.

Citation? Plus India and China are different countries in case you had forgotten, so no wonder one was in a different state to the other in 1978.

Quote:

No they were right. The USSR would have done so if there hadn't been an economic downturn due, for example, to agricultural crisis and the growth in weapon production.

Haha! In other words, it would have succeeded if it hadn't failed.

Quote:

Cuba is still alive and has a better HDI than the USA. Cubans are more educated and in a better health condition.

But they still lack a lot of access to consumer goods and other material benefits.

Now why don't you make that comparison between North and South Korea?

Quote:

Trading doesn't mean that you are not independant. You confuse independance and isolation. An independant country is a country that is ruling according to its own wishes.

No, you yourself pointed out North Korea received Soviet aid. And North Korea is not ruled according to its own wishes; it is ruled according to the ruling elite's wishes. No different from any other class society.

Quote:

but since North Korea survived the breakdown of the USSR, it's quite clear that North Korea was, indeed, economically independant.

No, it only survived because international aid donors gave and continue to give it food and medicine aid. How's that for communist honour?

Quote:

OMG, Marx struggled against capitalism. You are trying to transform Marx into a petty bourgeois to justify your own vacillations.

No, I'm trying to point out your ignorance. The fact that Marx devoted his magnum opus to a study of capitalism and the recognition he gave to its progressive nature shows how much he respected it. Just because he ultimately wanted to overthrow it doesn't mean he didn't realise it had progressive benefits within its historical context.

Quote:

- Not if he has no concrete, real right.
- Not if "still doing it" implies a punishment as a consequence.
Thus right isn't "metaphysical" as you said, right is a reality: ideological, or political reality (formal right), concrete reality (real right).

No, he can still do it irregardless of either of these. Murderers still commit murder even though they know it is prohibited by law and they have no right to do it.

Quote:

No, the climate isn't the same. Your are obviously not strong in dialectics.

Lol! The dialectics of the Korean climate? You're clearly not strong on geography. They share the same climate. The famine occurred because the farming system in North Korea is much less productive than in the South and the Soviets stopped providing food and fuel subsisidies. Hence "independent" North Korea had to go running to the World Food Organisation.

Quote:

Slapped their wrist? If China had done something like that, they would have taken a nuke on the head.

I never thought you were this deluded. Why would North Korea nuke their largest trade partner and aid lifeline? Never mind the fact that China would absolutely crush North Korea if it ever tried something like that. North Korea has just sent a high-ranking politican to China who it seems have chastised him and North Korea for its recent behaviour.

Quote:

Of course since you are not a Communist. Something like that would be shameful in France. Entering back into NATO is already shameful, but having US bases would be worst.

Worse than having famines and living in poverty?

Quote:

Who would say that? Not a Communist.

Like I said, you would rather be poor so long as you have "independence" and "honour". Boy do you know what people look for in society!

Quote:

70% percent of the Chinese economy is state-dominated. The only "problem" with North Korea is that it refuses to open itself to foreign investment, but this problem is also ist strength.

Actually, it's over 50%.

How is it a strength in North Korea? It results in a crap economy meaning the people live in poverty.

Quote:

And did they also deleted all mentions to Kim Il Sung ? No ? Because he was a Marxist and a Communist. Maybe not the best one, but he was.

So? He was also a Christian as a child but that doesn't mean Christianty is currently the state religion. You may also want to note that last year the NK government took down the paintings of Marx and Lenin in Km Il Sung square, Pyongyang.

http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/northko ... 00315.HTML

Quote:

As Lenin said, proletarian democracy isn't incompatible with the dictatorship of one man.

Then why do you support North Korea?

Quote:

As long as my fat friend represents the power of the Korean people, its interest as a people, the interest of the workers above all and their will to resist the southern puppet, then indeed North Korea is one hundred times more democratic than the South whose leadership represent only the power of the Korean bourgeoisie and of its American masters.

No, he represents the interests of the North Korea elite. Like how he got his wife a designer handbag. Also note how he was privately educated in Switzerland. How many average North Koreans get that sort of opportunity?

In fact, as far as I can tell, Kim Jong Un has still not been given a mandate to rule through a general election. He has therefore literally inherited power like the absolute monarch that he is.

Quote:

Haha! In other words, it would have succeeded if it hadn't failed.

No, it means that they failed because of external factors, mostly.

Quote:

But they still lack a lot of access to consumer goods and other material benefits.

No they don't. Ecology demands that we reduce global consumption. Americans and other western countries are fed like pigs. Since you are a capitalist you believe that people "need" the consumption goods created by capitalism, but they don't. Cuba needs above all the demise of its enemies.

Quote:

No, you yourself pointed out North Korea received Soviet aid.

I said trade, not aid.

Quote:

And North Korea is not ruled according to its own wishes; it is ruled according to the ruling elite's wishes. No different from any other class society.

That's only your opinion and your own wishes.

Quote:

No, it only survived because international aid donors gave and continue to give it food and medicine aid. How's that for communist honour?

They were forced to give this aid, because they were negociating peace.

Quote:

No, I'm trying to point out your ignorance.

I think your ignorance has been pointed out more than once there, and it will be pointed out once again.

The fact that Marx devoted his magnum opus to a study of capitalism and the recognition he gave to its progressive nature shows how much he respected it. Just because he ultimately wanted to overthrow it doesn't mean he didn't realise it had progressive benefits within its historical context.[/quote]
Capitalism is the system ruling the world, and it was already under Marx. Marx was a revolutionary, thus he studied capitalism, not because he "respected it", but because he wanted to overthrow it through a violent revolution.

Quote:

No, he can still do it irregardless of either of these. Murderers still commit murder even though they know it is prohibited by law and they have no right to do it.

Many don't commit murder because they fear the punishment.

Quote:

Lol! The dialectics of the Korean climate? You're clearly not strong on geography. They share the same climate.

Yes of course. Even in France we don't share the same climate... North Korea has a continental climate.

South Korea is green, North Korea isn't. That's enough about the climate.

Quote:

Like I said, you would rather be poor so long as you have "independence" and "honour". Boy do you know what people look for in society!

For the society of other persons. I'm a Communist, thus poverty with Communism is fine.

Quote:

Actually, it's over 50%.

No it's 70%, maybe not according to Wikipedia, your main reference, but I don't read Wikipedia.

Quote:

How is it a strength in North Korea? It results in a crap economy meaning the people live in poverty.

The more you allow free trade, the more you open your country to external threats. The situation in Syria is a clear result of that, amongst other causes.

Quote:

So? He was also a Christian as a child but that doesn't mean Christianty is currently the state religion. You may also want to note that last year the NK government took down the paintings of Marx and Lenin in Km Il Sung square, Pyongyang.

I also took down my painting of Stalin.

Quote:

Then why do you support North Korea?

I support North Korea because North Koreans struggle against imperialism, because they suffered an horrible war that they should have won, because I would have supported them 60 years ago, and I'm not a turncoat, because North Koreans are an example of bravery for they are still struggling despite all the difficultes and slander.

Quote:

No, he represents the interests of the North Korea elite.

An elite isn't a class.

Quote:

Like how he got his wife a designer handbag. Also note how he was privately educated in Switzerland. How many average North Koreans get that sort of opportunity?

Because that's an opportunity?

Quote:

In fact, as far as I can tell, Kim Jong Un has still not been given a mandate to rule through a general election. He has therefore literally inherited power like the absolute monarch that he is.

Ridiculous. He was elected by the Supreme People's Assembly.

Quote:

OMG, you are worst than Gred! What provocations? You think this missile crisis is a provocation? A provocation is what the US and their puppet are doing, making military exercices, sending more warships and even strategic bombers

Here's a some. A lot of these could easily be understood as acts of aggression.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombardment_of_Yeonpyeong
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1996_Gangn ... n_incident
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_House_Raid

As much as I love Korean culture, food, and traditions, my answer is no. I support the North Korean people, but I do not support the Kim dynasty.

I would not mind living in Cuba, Vietnam, or China.

To argue for capitalism, to seriously suggest it as a solution to anyone's problems, is to misunderstand that the bourgeoisie cannot play a progressive role anymore, anywhere.

In the few cases where imperialist domination has led to economic success - South Korea, Taiwan, West Germany etc. - this was allowed by the big imperialists in order to make these states look better than their stalinist counterparts - North Korea, the PRC, the GDR, etc. - as part of the Cold War. In fact the entire Asian Tiger phenomenon can be explained thus. It is not the rule, as the fate of the entire rest of the non-Western world clearly proves, and it would be foolish to expect any improvement at all from imperialist colonization of North Korea. The only class that can cause historical progress in Korea - or anywhere - is the working class. The bourgeoisie will never help us except against feudal forces like al-Qaida or what not, and even then they work together with them most of the time.

Quote:

To argue for capitalism, to seriously suggest it as a solution to anyone's problems, is to misunderstand that the bourgeoisie cannot play a progressive role anymore, anywhere.

Of course it can, because when one class becomes obsolete then another one has to take over sooner or later. In the concrete example of North Korea the bourgeoisie could have a tremendously positive and constructive role in rebuilding the country after decades of Kimilsungism.

Quote:

In the few cases where imperialist domination has led to economic success - South Korea, Taiwan, West Germany etc. - this was allowed by the big imperialists in order to make these states look better than their stalinist counterparts - North Korea, the PRC, the GDR, etc. - as part of the Cold War. In fact the entire Asian Tiger phenomenon can be explained thus.

But most of these Asian tigers were backwards and undeveloped until the 70s-80s and by that time the socialist block had already started declining. China too was starting with pro-market reforms and opening up.

Quote:

It is not the rule, as the fate of the entire rest of the non-Western world clearly proves, and it would be foolish to expect any improvement at all from imperialist colonization of North Korea

No it wouldn't. South Korea is a sovereign state with strong industry, it's among the 20 biggest economies in the world. For one i'm sure that a reunited Korea wouldn't have problems with feeding its population. And that is already a big step forward, because NK is pretty much the only E. Asian state that still has famines, even Cambodians have better agriculture. And i didn't even mention all the other things.

Quote:

The only class that can cause historical progress in Korea - or anywhere - is the working class.

In the end, yes. But the working class in North Korea is absolutely subjugated to the state, and you cannot move forward without an independent party of the working class.

Quote:

The bourgeoisie will never help us except against feudal forces like al-Qaida or what not, and even then they work together with them most of the time.

The red Latin America, i think, proves you wrong. These bourgeois regimes are indeed pro-working class in a sense, and work together with all kinds of socialists.

Quote:

Here's a some. A lot of these could easily be understood as acts of aggression.

Not by me. I can't call a military answer (the bombardment of Yeonpyeong) to a military provocation (military exercices) an "act of aggression". The North has no interest to make provocations of any kind, while a part of the ruling class in South Korea is certainly wishing to enter at war, knowing that the North wouldn't survive very long.

About the bourgeoisie, there isn't one bourgeoisie. There is the big bourgeoisie, the compradore bourgeoisie, the empoversihed bourgeoisie, the petty bourgeoisie... The empoverished and petty bourgeoisie can help us against the big bourgeoisie to some extent, sometimes to overthrow capitalism, sometimes to protect democracy (against fascism). A great part of the national bourgeoisie can also help us against the compradore bourgeoisie.

Quote:

No, it means that they failed because of external factors, mostly.

You said it happened in part due to an agricultural crisis. How is that an external factor?

Quote:

No they don't. Ecology demands that we reduce global consumption. Americans and other western countries are fed like pigs. Since you are a capitalist you believe that people "need" the consumption goods created by capitalism, but they don't. Cuba needs above all the demise of its enemies.

In North Korea, many people can be seen washing their clothes in rivers because they lack access to washing machines.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/zaruka/4948653548/

So are the South Koreans with washing machines greedy pigs who need to cut back and spend more time scrubbing their clothes in the local river? Or are the North Koreans struggling due to a lack of consumer goods?

Quote:

I said trade, not aid.

And yet when the South Korean economy does so well out of trading goods all over the world (including to the US), you seem to think that's cheating and an example of imperialism that disguises how weak the South Korean economy supposedly is.

Quote:

That's only your opinion and your own wishes.

In other words, you have no rebuttle.

Quote:

They were forced to give this aid, because they were negociating peace.

You are either desperate or deluded (or both). The west was not forced to give aid. North Korea has never signed a peace treaty with the US or South Korea and the only time it signed a ceasefire was in 1953 - decades before the famine. Also, how do you explain that North Korea's ally China gave aid as well? Were they negotiating peace with their ally?

Quote:

Capitalism is the system ruling the world, and it was already under Marx. Marx was a revolutionary, thus he studied capitalism, not because he "respected it", but because he wanted to overthrow it through a violent revolution.

You are so close-minded. You only see things in absolute terms, not relative. Ultimately, Marx wanted capitalism to be overthrown. But in the immediate sense he supported its revolutionary aspects in destroying feudalism and developing the means of production. This development clearly had (and in many countries, still has) much more potential to offer this development.

Quote:

Yes of course. Even in France we don't share the same climate... North Korea has a continental climate.

South Korea is green, North Korea isn't. That's enough about the climate.

Lol! Enough to show you are geographically retarded!

Although most countries have slight climate variations over their topography, you can generally generalise when it comes to things like this. Go into a mountain range and you will find a slightly different climate than in a valley or open fields.

Oh, and the fact that the North is brown may have something to do with the fact they practice extensive deforestation there because they don't have enough fuel. And while North Korea has a lot less arable land than the South, they also have over 50% fewer people.

Quote:

For the society of other persons. I'm a Communist, thus poverty with Communism is fine.

Not for the people living in it. That's why people overthrew socialism in the USSR and Eastern Bloc. Their standard of living just wasn't as good compared with the west. You might love your communist honour and independence but millions of ordinary workers clearly disagreed with you. People want better lives in a material way. That is what socialism should offer them. If all it can offer them is vague notions of honour and independence then it is no wonder you will need to start building Berlin Walls.

Quote:

No it's 70%, maybe not according to Wikipedia, your main reference, but I don't read Wikipedia.

Well since you didn't post a source for your claim (what's new?) I had to look it up for myself and predictably found a different answer.

Quote:

The more you allow free trade, the more you open your country to external threats. The situation in Syria is a clear result of that, amongst other causes.

Can you provide evidence of this correlation? Usually the west starts conflicts with countries which don't open up to free trade.

Quote:

I also took down my painting of Stalin.

Evasive. Answer my point. North Korea has erased all mention of Marxism, Leninism and communism from its constitution and its capital city.

Quote:

I support North Korea because North Koreans struggle against imperialism, because they suffered an horrible war that they should have won, because I would have supported them 60 years ago, and I'm not a turncoat, because North Koreans are an example of bravery for they are still struggling despite all the difficultes and slander.

Yes, by all means support the people. It's the leadership who are rotten to the core.

Quote:

An elite isn't a class.

How did it get to be an elite then? The elite are the ones who get preferential access to food, good homes in Pyongyang and well-paying jobs. They often get this through their birthright as accorded to them by the Songbun status system. They are the modern-day Yangban.

Quote:

Because that's an opportunity?

Yes, Switzerland has some of the best private schools in the world. If it was no better than sending him to a North Korean school why didn't they just do that? Also, Kim Il Sung went to a Swiss hospital whe he was sick.

Quote:

Ridiculous. He was elected by the Supreme People's Assembly.

I meant a general election by the whole people.

Quote:

You said it happened in part due to an agricultural crisis. How is that an external factor?

Can you control the wheather?

Quote:

I meant a general election by the whole people.

That's called caesarism.

Quote:

Evasive. Answer my point. North Korea has erased all mention of Marxism, Leninism and communism from its constitution and its capital city.

As if there was only two mentions of Marxism-leninism in North Korea, one in the constitution and one in the capital city. This isn't a point but a joke.

Quote:

Also, how do you explain that North Korea's ally China gave aid as well?

What colour was Henry IV white horse?

Quote:

Can you provide evidence of this correlation? Usually the west starts conflicts with countries which don't open up to free trade.

Syria didn't opened entierly but it made concessions to radical islamists who were allowed to preach publicly. Syria also liberalized its economy at the beginning of the century.

Quote:

That is what socialism should offer them. If all it can offer them is vague notions of honour and independence then it is no wonder you will need to start building Berlin Walls.

You can't offer them something like that immediately. No revolution did that. The only thing you can offer is more power to the people, and this is enough. Most of the time your economy will know many difficulties and you will have to struggle against foreign forces. Many will die. You won't ask people if they want a revolution with all its consequences, revolution will become a necessity. There was a revolution in Korea, they struggled, they failed, but they are still alive, and the only thing you propose is surrender. That's what traitors do.

Quote:

In North Korea, many people can be seen washing their clothes in rivers because they lack access to washing machines.

Good, we should start doing the same.

Mabool wrote:

To argue for capitalism, to seriously suggest it as a solution to anyone's problems, is to misunderstand that the bourgeoisie cannot play a progressive role anymore, anywhere.

In the few cases where imperialist domination has led to economic success - South Korea, Taiwan, West Germany etc. - this was allowed by the big imperialists in order to make these states look better than their stalinist counterparts - North Korea, the PRC, the GDR, etc. - as part of the Cold War. In fact the entire Asian Tiger phenomenon can be explained thus. It is not the rule, as the fate of the entire rest of the non-Western world clearly proves, and it would be foolish to expect any improvement at all from imperialist colonization of North Korea. The only class that can cause historical progress in Korea - or anywhere - is the working class. The bourgeoisie will never help us except against feudal forces like al-Qaida or what not, and even then they work together with them most of the time.

Then how come capitalism is creating so much development in India, China, Indonesia, Vietnam, Brazil, Ghana, Thailand, Malaysia etc? Why have Burma just begun to open themselves up to the world market and liberal economic reforms? They know the development rewards it can bring.

OP-Bagration wrote:

Not by me. I can't call a military answer (the bombardment of Yeonpyeong) to a military provocation (military exercices) an "act of aggression".

Loads of countries do military exercises every year. That doesn't mean they justify shelling a load of civilians living on an island. India tested a nuclear-capable missile back in April. Did Pakistan respond by shelling Indian villages? No.

Quote:

Loads of countries do military exercises every year. That doesn't mean they justify shelling a load of civilians living on an island. India tested a nuclear-capable missile back in April. Did Pakistan respond by shelling Indian villages? No.

A military exercice is a preparation for war if its directed clearly against a country. Did the USA made military preparations against Canada? Did France made military preparations against Syria or Germany? Obviously not. A military exercice on a border is sufficient to trigger a war, especially a preemptive strike.

gRed Britain wrote:

In North Korea, many people can be seen washing their clothes in rivers because they lack access to washing machines.

OP-Bagration wrote:

Good, we should start doing the same.

Bargtion, ,you are making a fool out of yourself. Do shut up.