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

Traitor Jang Song Thaek Executed

POST REPLY
Soviet cogitations: 1128
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 30 Aug 2008, 18:12
Party Member
Post 30 Dec 2013, 01:26
@Misuzu: Are you even going to attempt to answer any of my points?

How do you reconcile the accusations against Jang of corruption and leading a decadent lifestyle when Kim Jong-Un and his wife flaunt theirs so openly?
Soviet cogitations: 12389
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 18 Apr 2010, 04:44
Ideology: None
Philosophized
Post 30 Dec 2013, 01:31
gRed Britain wrote:
How do you reconcile the accusations against Jang of corruption and leading a decadent lifestyle when Kim Jong-Un and his wife flaunt theirs so openly?

It really comes down to the fact that there's a certain standard of living for the Emperor, who is entitled to live in boundless splendor. Then there's a different standard of living for his humble subjects, who are expected to content themselves with varying degrees of subsistence at the Emperor's pleasure. How well they fare is dependent on their nearness, usefulness, and, above all, faithfulness to him.
Miss Strangelove: "You feed giants laxatives so goblins can mine their poop before the gnomes get to it."
[+-]
Soviet cogitations: 589
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 07 Dec 2013, 14:24
Ideology: Democratic Socialism
Unperson
Post 30 Dec 2013, 11:17
Who said satire was dead! A letter from Dermot Hudson to the Morning Star...please dont laugh too much comrades. He believes this!

YOUR editorial Schism in North Korea (M Star December 16) was without a doubt one of the worst articles ever to appear in the Morning Star.

The Star has truly crossed the Rubicon. It has degenerated from being a revisionist newspaper into being openly pro-imperialist, anti-communist and social democratic.

The editorial rehashed the lies of the capitalist press with a few cheap throwaway jibes aimed at currying favour with Trotskyites.

The article reads like a mixture of the Sun newspaper and the Socialist Worker.

The defeat of the counter-revolutionary faction in the DPRK should be a matter for congratulation.

The swift, decisive and resolute action taken by Marshal Kim Jong Un has dealt a blow to the imperialists — as shown by the reactionary Lord Alton’s comments that Jang Song Thaek was “a real hope for reform” in the DPRK.

The class enemy is angry about the elimination of its agent in the DPRK but why should the Star, a “socialist daily newspaper,” join hands with them in attacking the DPRK?

Had the Soviet Union taken similar decisive measures against Gorbachov and Yeltsin socialism would still exist in the USSR today — this is a fact.

All the old lies of the capitalist media about the DPRK are spewed up by the Morning Star.

Rather than living standards declining in the DPRK they are improving as a large number of leisure and cultural facilities have been built in the past 18 months.

Education and health care are free in the DPRK, housing is virtually free and people do not pay tax.

The Pyongyang Metro is the cheapest in the world at only 2.5p per journey and a litre of beer costs just 20p.

What is this if not socialism?

There is no schism in the DPRK – a handful of counter-revolutionary factionalists do not represent anyone.

The people are solidly united around the party and the leader.

DERMOT HUDSON – London SE18


20p a litre of beer? What more do the comrades want! Wadda mean they only get $30 a month wages???
[+-]
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 3618
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 22 Oct 2004, 15:15
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Politburo
Post 30 Dec 2013, 11:35
Misuzu wrote:
What is your evidence that the North his reverted to capitalism? Is it because of the Lenin and Marx portraits? Portraits prove nothing as China has never removed Mao's face from Tienamen Square and his face is still on every single renminbi note. Because they work with and trade with capitalist countries? By that logic, Stalin must have restored capitalism to the USSR when he entered into numerous joint ventures with Western corporations. These joint ventures were necessary to build the USSR's industry, and similar measures are required by Korea today to modernise its energy, industrial, and technological capabilities and to obtain hard currency for basic essentials. As long as private property remains outlawed in the DPRK, then I will say that capitalist relations has not been restored.

Plenty of opportunists were able to worm their way into high position of power so that they can be misused; after all, it is very common to mis-judge somebody's character. People like Deng and Gorbachev gained power precisely because the purging mechanisms were too weak to stop them.

Capital punishment will be necessary, at least during a revolution to remove dangerous people from society. I am not somebody who advocates mass killings, I am just realistic about the costs of revolution.

It was necessary to execute Jang because he was a ringleader of a conspiracy to overthrow the DPRK government that has been going on since at least the mid-1990s. Now that both him and his ally Hwang Jang-yop are dead, the pro-capitalist faction has lost their major leaders.

That's an extremely easy thing to say when you live in a first-world country that isn't being sanctioned by the Imperialist UN Security Council, and is primarily being threatened by three countries, the United States, South Korea, which has its military spending partially subsidised by the US, and Japan, whose Prime Minister and his associates have a bad habit of denying that there a nothing wrong with what Japan did in the 1930s and early 1940s. How is it anything unlike the situation faced by Stalin in the 1930s? I don't deny that the North Korean government has committed excesses, just as the Soviet government committed its own excesses during the Great Purge. In order to truly what is happening in North Korean society, it is necessary to see why these excesses were/ are being committed in the first place.


It is difficult to have a proper discussion if the main arguments are consistently ignored in favour of nitpicking specific lines (your own interpretations of them, no less). Here are two crucial ones from my last post:

-There was no point in executing the guy because foreign reaction (or even invasion, which is a ridiculous scenario from you) might want to set him free or demand his release. I would add that, right now, the US can't even free its own citizens from the DPRK.
-Jang did not "worm his way into position". He was deliberately assigned, promoted, purged, rehabilitated, and elevated again under both Kim Jong-il and Kim Jong-un. I don't think he ever pretended to be some hardcore Marxist-Leninist. Whatever pro-capitalist reforms Jang can be blamed for, both Kims partook in them. If Jang deserves to be hauled out of a meeting and shot for this, then so does Kim Jong-un.

To add to this, it's typical comic-book ideology to think that opportunists and capitalist-roaders just "worm their way in". They would not have gotten anywhere if they had no material to work with, if everything was hunky-dory. Gorbachev would never have stood a chance if he had not found the Soviet Union stagnant, and if the way had not been paved for him by Andropov's more careful reforms. Deng would have remained out of favour if not for the weariness after a decade of Cultural Revolution. These people emerge from the existing conditions, not just because they sneak in with an evil plan in their heads.

It is likewise with the DPRK, which is in a very precarious position, both because of internal and external reasons. Surely you must realise that the DPRK is not "building" socialism, or indeed anything else right now, or progressing in any way. There is just the struggle to survive, and that leads to the constant vacillation between hard-line policies and reform, between threats and rapprochement, etc. The ruling clique, consisting of the family and the military, are trying to reform, while avoiding any rapid changes that could make their own position doubtful or irrelevant. The family succession and the military-first policies are examples of this attempt to provide stability.

It is therefore not surprising to me that a DPRK official has already said that Jang's execution will not change economic policies at all. In other words, it's "Jangism without Jang". The problem with Jang was that he tried to build his own power base on these economic policies. The denunciation in KCNA is very clear about that. In the conditions of the DPRK as I have described them, it is only logical that there are going to be power struggles between the current ruling clique, and those who would rather see the economic reforms managed in a technocratic manner, sabotaging the military control and the family cult that has provided stability so far.

It's hard to state a preference in this matter, because both have their obvious pros and cons. But what the execution of Jang shows is that the jockeying for power is growing increasingly bitter and desperate. It represents an acknowledgement of opposition within the ruling party, which usually presents a face of unity, and the very cruel and public disgrace and execution of Jang shows that nobody is untouchable, and is clearly meant to intimidate. It's somewhat amusing for me to joke about "King Joffrey", but the fact of the matter is that this is very serious, and that the struggle as I've outlined it could lead to a lot more blood being spilled. On the mid-long-term, this poses a humanitarian danger. But you don't have to take it from me, or even from "bourgeois sources" (boo! Hiss!). The editorial of the socialist daily, the Morning Star, says as much here. This is also decent.

But of course I cannot prevent you or anyone else from thinking that this is somehow a good thing, that this is progress. Yes, it is easy to type this from a computer in a first-world country that isn't being sanctioned. I suppose your posts are being brought to us by a 56k modem in the slums of Mogadishu? That you're only writing your sarcastic evasions of the fundamental matters as a 10-minute break from hard manual labour, building tank traps on the road from the DMZ to Pyongyang? You wear a hair shirt? Yeah, I thought not. People have been posting this "you from your comfortable western armchair" on leftist forums for decades, and it's as unconvincing as always, simply because we're all in the same boat, and because it usually prefaces the less realistic posts.

The point about Stalin-era executions is that all we can do now is look back at them with hindsight and ponder either the necessity or the cruelty of both the general matter and specific cases, with reference to the context of the time, in which the death penalty was ubiquitous. However, today, we've got the knowledge of decades of debates and campaigns that led to the abolition of capital punishment in many countries, and we can argue against it, both on practical and moral grounds, with more confidence. It won't change anything in the DPRK, but I don't see the point in making concessions on such basic principles, just because you think the death of this one guy could be beneficial (even though, according to the DPRK itself, nothing will change because of this).

Now, there are two positions which you attribute to me which I've never expressed:

- The DPRK is capitalist. (I think it's difficult to call, to be honest)
- The DPRK is capitalist because they removed the portraits of Marx and Lenin.

If you've got voices in your head, that is a matter between yourself, your therapist, and your God, but don't bother me with it. But I'm still waiting for your explanation of what will change if the DPRK were to trade with more countries, as long as your own criteria for socialism (private property illegal in the DPRK, joint ventures with businesses from other countries) are upheld.

Still, I don't understand why you bring up the portraits, since it can only work to your disadvantage. A state is not socialist or capitalist because of the portraits it hangs or removes, but obviously, symbolism matters to some extent. It can either signal changes to come, or it can be a visual representation of what has already been done. The French Communist Party is not revisionist because it removed the hammer and sickle from their membership cards, but they removed it in order to reflect this orientation better.

Marx and Lenin don't matter because they look pretty on a portrait. They matter because they gave the workers' movement the tools to understand and change the world around them. To pretend that they don't exist, and to replace the acknowledgement of them with the idol-worship of members of one family, does not change much in itself, but it sends a terrible signal about your priorities. We can admire the DPRK for defending its sovereignty forever, and defend it against some of the more absurd accusations that its enemies make, but that doesn't mean we can't say what's wrong either.
[+-]
Soviet cogitations: 589
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 07 Dec 2013, 14:24
Ideology: Democratic Socialism
Unperson
Post 30 Dec 2013, 11:57
I wonder if the executed Jang will be airbrushed out of history? We all know how stupid that is when the USSR used to remove people from photographs or official history the regime ended up a laughing stock. As the old soviet joke went “nobody knows what will happen yesterday.”

But I think that supporters of the regime think that as the regime in the DPKR gets closer to socialism, the forces of reaction will intensify their efforts to destroy it, so this execution is just the tip of the iceberg!
So the closer you get to pure socialism in the DPRK the more people need to die! Eventually on the morning they achieve socialism there probably won’t be many people there to celebrate.
Soviet cogitations: 672
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 01 Mar 2011, 14:10
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Komsomol
Post 31 Dec 2013, 07:15
Yami wrote:
I wonder if the executed Jang will be airbrushed out of history? We all know how stupid that is when the USSR used to remove people from photographs or official history the regime ended up a laughing stock. As the old soviet joke went “nobody knows what will happen yesterday.”
I don't think anyone is going to care if a particularly corrupt bureaucrat is airbrushed out of history, there isn't really much "history" for him anyway outside of being on a list of "Kim Jong Il was joined in his visit to the Pyongyang toy factory by comrades [insert]" or mentioning he was promoted to random political/military posts. It's not like he fought alongside Kim Il Sung against the Japanese or something.
[+-]
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 9187
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 19 Mar 2005, 20:08
Embalmed
Post 31 Dec 2013, 14:29
Ismail wrote:
I don't think anyone is going to care if a particularly corrupt bureaucrat is airbrushed out of history, there isn't really much "history" for him anyway outside of being on a list of "Kim Jong Il was joined in his visit to the Pyongyang toy factory by comrades [insert]" or mentioning he was promoted to random political/military posts. It's not like he fought alongside Kim Il Sung against the Japanese or something.


But what about all the good things he did, such as
Image

"Bleh, i don't even know what i'm arguing for. What a stupid rant. Disregard what i wrote." - Loz
"Every time is gyros time" - Stalinista
Soviet cogitations: 12389
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 18 Apr 2010, 04:44
Ideology: None
Philosophized
Post 31 Dec 2013, 19:06
Well, his promotion to Deputy Lieutenant Assistant to the Undersecretary of the Executive Vice President enabled him to significantly
Miss Strangelove: "You feed giants laxatives so goblins can mine their poop before the gnomes get to it."
Soviet cogitations: 10005
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 14 Jul 2008, 20:01
Ideology: Trotskyism
Philosophized
Post 09 Jan 2014, 22:30
Quote:
A litre of beer costs just 20p.

What is this if not socialism?


High aspirations right there.
"Don't know why i'm still surprised with this shit anyway." - Loz
lev
[+-]
Soviet cogitations: 256
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 02 Jan 2016, 14:43
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Komsomol
Post 02 Jan 2016, 14:52
Just like an employee or a manager who has fallen out of grace from the CEO, the judgment is fair. You don't go to the CEO's office and say f*** y**. No matter how humane he is, he'll fire you.
Alternative Display:
Mobile view
More Forums: The History Forum. The UK Politics Forum.
© 2000- Soviet-Empire.com. Privacy.