Matthew Miller sentenced to 6 year labour camp in North Korea, other trials expected

More likely than he read the manifesto and got excited is that he knows American defectors can sometimes life a life of privileged luxury as the perennial villains of propaganda films.
 
More likely than he read the manifesto and got excited is that he knows American defectors can sometimes life a life of privileged luxury as the perennial villains of propaganda films.

I believe only "high value" defectors would be used for propaganda. Like famous actresses, educated professor with noble prize, military ranking general. My guess is North Korea probably more scared of western defector contaminating them, and this probably a way of getting some $$$ from a ransom.
 
Hey, like that one time they got several Japanese actors to make a North Korean version of Godzilla!
 
There's also the problem that most liberals can't differentiate between "defending DPRK" and "supporting/endorsing DPRK."

Just the same, there are communists who can't differentiate between "critical of DPRK" and "siding with imperialism against DPRK."

Lack of attention to nuances all around.
Sorry, but I don't think anything in luiz's argument changes even after we substitute "endorsing" with "defending".
There is nothing to endorse about DPRK. There is nothing worth defending about it either. And the only ones who bother doing either are a breed of particularly intellectually challenged reds.
 
I can't believe you called someone intellectually challenged by way of missing their non-nuanced way of explaining how people miss nuance.
 
I can't believe you missed it was the people who defend/endorse NK whom I called "intellectually challenged" and not Cheezy.

...unless he has done it too and I have missed it? :shifty:
Colour me most disappointed then.
 
I can't believe you missed it was the people who defend/endorse NK whom I called "intellectually challenged" and not Cheezy.

...unless he has done it too and I have missed it? :shifty:
Colour me most disappointed then.

It's in his post. Flip the bottom pair and the top and bottom criss-cross with the top. "Defend" refers to defending North Korea as an agent of anti-imperialism, or specifically, defending the part of the DPRK that acts anti-imperially. As such defending North Korea can occur concurrently with being critical of their non-socialist, human-rights violating ways.
 
Johan Gottlieb Fichte, that is quite the point missed!

I wound also differentiate, though, between active anti-imperialism, and resistance to imperialist actions against DPRK itself. The former implies conspiracy (which again may or may not be both true and laudable) while the latter is merely "standing up for oneself" against international bullies.

For, while even if capitalist, DPRK is certainly in no sense imperialist, and is thus victimized by the World Powers At Large, very often unfairly.
 
Now here's where I make it silly:

What, Yeekim, you could have said was that Cheezy bringing up this issue of nuance in no way invalidates luiz's frustration that indeed stems from his reading endorsements of the DPRK here. But then Cheezy would get to point out that luiz inspired a conversational pivot and Hygro misses the point by thinking Cheezy was trying to dismiss luiz's view by being reminded to remind us of the frustrations of folks not getting important nuance.
 
I sense a nuance of confusion here, but that's probably from me.

"I can't believe you" people are missing a meme here.

"Nuance of confusion"! Yeah. Nice.

After that I'm completely lost.
 
"I can't believe you" people are missing a meme here.

"Nuance of confusion"! Yeah. Nice.

After that I'm completely lost.

We're currently paving the way to a very, very confusing form of Hell here in this thread as it might appear.
 
You seem to conflate 'not left-wing' with 'right-wing'. On most issues of policy that could be laid on a left-right political spectrum, I'm some distance to the left of what most people would consider the centre. Don't assume that, because I tend to find it more worthwhile on this website to engage critically with arguments put forward by people to my left, I'm at all sympathetic to right-wing politics. My principle aim in discussing matters here is to better develop my own views, and I find that to be ill-served by getting into shouting matches with right-wingers, whose arguments I usually find to be deeply uninteresting (with some notable exceptions).

Since I don't know anyone on this forum personally, I have to adopt an empirical approach in judging posters' positions. You really can't blame anyone for judging you based on what you post or on the PMs you send. If you object to the judgement, you can either clarify your position (difficult without proof when it's a general question) or get better at expressing your own position.

That being said, I can identify left-wing criticism of the left. What it normally does not involve is the use of typical right-wing talking points. Besides, from experience, you are a zealous anti-Marxist who is utterly convinced beyond swaying that Marxist schools have little to contribute today. I think I can safely assume that constructive discussion with you on the topic of Marxism is futile.
 
I'll just leave with a thematic anecdote:

- Comrade Chapaev, what does "nuance" mean?
- See, Petka, when private Ivanov has his nose in private Sidorov's ass, both Ivanov and Sidorov have nose in ass... but there's also an important nuance!
 
I think I can safely assume that constructive discussion with you on the topic of Marxism is futile.
"Better dead than red" is about as constructive as any talk about Marxism deserves. At least as far as sovereign state governments are concerned. I could be enticed to be okay with voluntary communes with no authority outside their voluntary commune. This Miller probably should have found a group of hippies to defect to before going for the gusto with the DPRK.
 
Yeah... but...

But that's just pointless sloganeering for the sake of it, Mr Sup, isn't it?

Next thing we know, you'll be talking about the yellow peril, and...

and Mexicans.
 
Top Bottom