Soviet-Empire.com U.S.S.R. and communism historical discussion.
[ Active ]
[ Login ]
Log-in to remove these advertisements.

Are people in NK really starving?

POST REPLY
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 260
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 16 Dec 2011, 00:54
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Komsomol
Post 21 Jun 2013, 07:00
In terms of renewables they would be best served by a mix of Tidal Power on the coasts, Geothermal Power could be viable due to heat increase deeper below ground & Closed loop Aquaponic systems producing Duckweed which is not only high in vitamins but also starch making it highly useful for fermentation to produce ethanol as a biofuel. it can also be used in Gassification processes to make gas to Burn for power & the ashes can become fertiliser.
Duckweed also helps to filter & clean water that contains sewage & fish can also be fed with it to produce livestock & fish faeces for more fertiliser.
"A shiny bauble from Capitalism is worthless when the cost is Children & the Elderly going hungry, The Infirm & Sick dying because of Greed & Education reduced to a token few to placate the masses with Illusions of freedom."
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 14444
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 10 Sep 2006, 22:05
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Philosophized
Post 21 Jun 2013, 07:32
The problem with all alternatives to oil is that they would require massive amounts of tech and capital to implement. They cannot even afford oil as it is let alone the investment that such alternatives require. Basically the DPRK is a strangled country and until this strangulation ends only two options are possible:

  • The DPRK is taken to war which can only be disasterous to the extreme resulting in mass death in the north as well as an even more corrupt and fascistic ROK
  • Barracks Communism continues with Chinese assistance
Image
[+-]
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 221
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 04 Feb 2013, 06:55
Ideology: Democratic Socialism
Pioneer
Post 21 Jun 2013, 08:50
Yes they are, due to the Supreme dickhead, Kim Il Sung's Songun policy, their imperialist like military get all of the food while the people of the DPRK starve. The DPRK state media and other brainwashed fools on here say "OH ITS NOT THEIR FAULT!!, ITS THE IMPERIALUST UNITED STATES OF AMERIKKKA, THEY EMBARGO THEM SO THEY DONT GET FOOD" The real reason why they arent receiving food from the outside is because A. In the late 90s, Clinton sent them food and supplies for the people, and who did they give the food to? THE MILITARY! B. Now the US and other nations are embargoing them because why should we send them food and supplies to a nation thats threatening thermo nuclear war and if we WOULD send them food and supplies it would just go right to their military machine which is threatening South Korea and Japan.
Image
Soviet cogitations: 1093
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 06 Mar 2008, 22:11
Party Member
Post 01 Jul 2013, 01:20
Ah gotta love hypocrisy. The US govt can go around and do all sorts of horrible shit to other countries. Poison their people. Starve them. Take away the govt they wanted. All of it and steal their resources on the way out. Yet, nothing has ever happened to the government. They have never been with an embargo. Yet, countries like the DPRK, Cuba, Iran and others get embargoed sometimes even for just existing like Cuba. It's really quite ridiculous honestly. I don't like weapons and despise them personally, but at the same time I'm a realist and know they exist. All I ask is don't be a hypocrite about it ya know? (Not anyone in particular just in general as a world community) And as far as feeding soldiers with food given: no shit. If you perceive your country to be under attack who are you going to take care of? The people who protect you. It's not really rocket science.
Image
[+-]
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 3618
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 22 Oct 2004, 15:15
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Politburo
Post 09 Jul 2013, 11:49
There hasn't been a massive famine like in the 1990s, but the situation is still very precarious, and starvation does still happen locally. Every flood and every political crisis is a humanitarian disaster waiting to happen. The current situation is a kind of "life support" that barely keeps the patient alive, but nothing more. What you get is a country where the only thing preventing a 1990s-style famine is black markets, militarisation and foreign aid. Until some kind of breakthrough occurs, another malnourished and stunted generation will come of age.

Their geographical situation doesn't help farming, and besides that, they lack fertilisers and mechanisation (due to the lack of oil). Since the fall of the Soviet bloc, they no longer get oil at "solidarity" prices, so tractors and farm machinery ended up lying unused. The floods in 1995 destroyed 85% of power-producing capacity, and this in turn paralysed all electric rail transportation. Nobody denies that political and economic mismanagement also played a massive part, but it's idiocy to pretend that there are no other factors and that they're just starving their people for shits and giggles.

But of course there are plenty of tools here who claim that North Korea is not a mountainous country with 18% arable land, that it never gets flooded, and that food is not grown, but magically created out of thin air when the president throws a higher percentage of money into the "food hole". And never mind the fact that the countries that provide food aid to North Korea don't do this out of charity, but that they use food as a weapon to increase their bargaining position. For instance, in 2005, Bush reduced the amount of food aid to 10% of what it had been a year before. But of course the North Koreans are ungrateful swine for "blaming the imperialists who feed them".

There is a lot to criticise about the attempts at self-sufficiency and the privileging of the military, but people forget that these policies are actually the consequence of the 1990s situation. They strove for self-sufficiency because of what happened to the economy that was dependent on friendly relations with the USSR. They privileged the military because the 1990s crisis disrupted regular economic activities.

People conveniently forget that the KPA doesn't just sit there waiting for an invasion, but that it is also instrumental in infrastructure works and the like. When all of your economic activity collapses and the whole bureaucracy involved in central planning becomes useless, and the military is the only institution that can still get anything done in an organised way, then that's not entirely illogical. Of course it also opens a whole new can of worms, for instance the massive amount of political power concentrated in the army, and the corruption and dependence that this brings.
Soviet cogitations: 1
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 09 Sep 2013, 18:41
New Comrade (Say hi & be nice to me!)
Post 09 Sep 2013, 19:21
Nice Question.

I probably cannot answer your question, yet it blows me away to see how two nations having the same ancestors, genetics and origins can go in extreme separate and opposite directions. People who study economy or human development usually attribute most of the success on factors such as race or ethnicity or religion, but it North Korea and Sourth korea are a perfect example of how politics and economic systems can be the major players in the rise and fall of nations.

1- North Korea, dictatorship and poverty, South Korea, Freedom and Prosprity

2- Simple comparison of the GDP per Capita between North Korea and South Korea reveals the difference. South Korea's GDP per capita is 20 times higher than that of North Korea

3- South Korea manufactures and exports all sort of machinery, vehicles, electronics, computers..North Korea exports just the mere basics of minerals, metallurgical products, manufactures (including armaments), textiles, agricultural and fishery products.
Soviet cogitations: 54
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 27 Nov 2013, 03:30
Unperson
Post 26 Feb 2014, 02:35
If I were to choose between watching a movie and buying food and I would choose the former, am I starving? If I were to choose between buying a TV set and food and I prefer the TV, am I starving? Some of us here are victims of scam artist propagandists of Langley.
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 52
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 28 Oct 2009, 18:26
Ideology: None
Pioneer
Post 04 Sep 2014, 22:42
Are the people starving? I have been to the DPRK five times and I am leaving next week for another round. I have been all over the country in rural areas, in isolated villages and the coal mining towns of the northern border. The answer is a definitive NO. This is a myth left over from the famine and something the west wants to keep saying.

NOW - what is it like?

Image


A truck driver's family we happened upon by the roadside.

I am nosy. I go up to people eating lunch and dinner and see what they are eating. I ask school children what they had for the morning meal. I look for listlessness on the rural school playgrounds. I look for rickets and vitamin deficiencies with physicians. I get their opinions. No, not starvation.

Image


When you are there you have to ignore Pyongyang but on the back streets of the city you can watch a soup line or food distribution areas. I have been in a market area (without camera) and checked out prices and availability. I have watched food distribution in smaller towns as well.

Take a look at this:

Image


This is a women selling ice cream waiting for the middle school to close at the end of the day. If the society is starving why would I see these at most every middle school in the rural areas of the country? If they are starving why isn't every won being used for sustenance?

I will say that we have seen issues of a lack of a balanced diet in some areas. Average height is certainly lower than the ROK and the food situation I saw in 2008 was worse than in 2013 and the years I visited in between. I have purchased and brought vitamins for the children of my friends there.

Image

Children in Wonsan

I think the food situation has gotten much better over the years but it still is uneven.
Alternative Display:
Mobile view
More Forums: The History Forum. The UK Politics Forum.
© 2000- Soviet-Empire.com. Privacy.