A Glimpse Into Daily Life In North Korea

[Cheezy the Wiz]

Mehh... what makes a philosopy legit?

How much I agree with it.

 

[Takhisis]

Is Juche a philosophy to begin with? Or is it just a lot of mad writing by the Kims trying to legitimise their own rule without any sort of internal logic?

On a lighter note:

Link to video.

Link to video.

Link to video.

 

[ParkCungHee]

Is Juche a philosophy to begin with? Or is it just a lot of mad writing by the Kims trying to legitimise their own rule without any sort of internal logic?

From what I've read, and I'm no specialist, it seems fairly reasonable, and begins with an attempt at a general view of society, rather then specific legitimizations.
Certainly loads more meaningful then when Park used the term.

 

[RedRalph]

To the people who are calling this apologism...

Look. If someone told you that in North Korea, every citizens was tortured for five hours a day and then their children were tortured in front of them and then they were eaten by dogs, wouldn't you say "I really don't think it's that bad"? Would that make you an apologist?

I don't see anyone here saying that North Korea is a nice place to live. People are just pointing out that the day-to-day life for most people may not be the unyielding torment you imagine it to be.

 

[Thoughtful Thug]

Well I am not going to celebrate Juche 101 next year unless I am invited to a North Korean costume party accompanied with hot looking Korean chicks.

... say wut?

Seriously, my understanding of DPRK is that they have a two class tier in the country consisting of a military bureaucracy and the lower tier being theoretically equal - depending on where they work and what that is of course.

 

[Bamspeedy]

and the patrons in the photo didn't look like Kim Jong-Il's inner circle.

'Elite' doesn't mean the top 0.001%.

The top 10% is still over 2 million people (or top 1% being 200,000), plenty of people that demand products that may not be accessible to the other 90%, (or 99%).

The OP talked of many people bringing TVs back with them on the plane, yeah don't pretend that those flying on the plane aren't from at least the top 10%. And why in the heck can't your picture be of an airport? Do you see anybody with more luggage than a handbag? Why do you 'doubt' they flew on a plane?

To the people who are calling this apologism...

Look. If someone told you that in North Korea, every citizens was tortured for five hours a day and then their children were tortured in front of them and then they were eaten by dogs, wouldn't you say "I really don't think it's that bad"? Would that make you an apologist?

I don't see anyone here saying that North Korea is a nice place to live. People are just pointing out that the day-to-day life for most people may not be the unyielding torment you imagine it to be.

If that is all one was attempting to do I would agree with them, that it isn't that bad. But that is not what some are doing.

 

[Arwon]

This thread continues to be deeply confusing.

 

[Formaldehyde]

The OP talked of many people bringing TVs back with them on the plane, yeah don't pretend that those flying on the plane aren't from at least the top 10%. And why in the heck can't your picture be of an airport? Do you see anybody with more luggage than a handbag? Why do you 'doubt' they flew on a plane?

I'm not "pretending" anything, much less presuming they must all belong to a special class of people with no actual evidence to back it up. But I do agree the people are quite likely more affluent than the average based on the fact that they could afford plane tickets and could purchase electronic goods. Do you consider all businessmen and engineers who work in the private sector to be members of this elite, or is it more a term for those who have high-level governmental jobs and who receive favoritism from the state on that basis?

Regarding the photo, Korea isn't that large so I think it makes more sense it to be a train station instead if they are Koreans traveling to Pyongyang as the tag on the photo suggests. It certainly appears to be one based on the relative lack of luggage. But I as I clearly stated, it may be very well be an airport. Does it really matter? I merely found a photo of a group of people to show that Pyongyang and other cities aren't relatively deserted during the daytime as you were alleging based on your photos. Once again, there are 3.2 million people in Pyongyang. Using your estimate of 10% elite, that still leaves 2.9 million who are not. I seriously doubt most of them stay at home instead of going out to work, to do shopping, and to entertain themselves.

When many Americans and Westerners think of NK they think of this, because until quite recently they were not allowed to visit:

They seem to forget that 1 million South Koreans have traveled to one particular province to vacation since 1998. That many South Koreans and others have been traveling to visit their relatives and vacationing there for many years now. That Pyongyang has a number of large hotels to accommodate them. This hospitality just hasn't been open to many Westerners whom the North Koreans suspect are trying to overthrow their government and may even invade their country until quite recently. I can't say I'm very surprised at their attitude towards all this overt hostility. But based on the photos and stories now emerging such as this, the real North Korea appears to be far from the one portrayed in the parody Team America: World Police.

While Kim Jung-Il rules with an iron hand and the economy of NK places them far from the US and Western Europe, the people of North Korea appear to be relatively happy and well-clothed from the few photos we now have. Kim Jung-Il is also 70 years old and his appointed successor appears to be far less authoritarian. Is there room for change with far more personal freedom and liberty? Certainly. Will it one day reunify with South Korea and actually end this 60-year-old war? I certainly hope so. Is it the "hellhole" than many Americans imagine it to be? Apparently not except for the large number who are in their prisons. But many so-called democracies have quite similar hellholes for those who have the temerity to disagree with their own leaders. Many of the worst offenders which also have authoritarian forms of government, such as Saudi Arabia, are even staunch allies of the US. For some odd reason, their similar deeds are rarely vilified with such gusto.

I think it is clear that American meddling in the affairs of Korea has made things far worse in the past 10 years. That an American president almost visited North Korea beforehand speaks volumes about the difference between encouraging peace and harmony and intentionally doing just the opposite, apparently contrary to the wishes of the vast majority of South Koreans themselves.

 

[kochman]

To the people who are calling this apologism...

Look. If someone told you that in North Korea, every citizens was tortured for five hours a day and then their children were tortured in front of them and then they were eaten by dogs, wouldn't you say "I really don't think it's that bad"? Would that make you an apologist?

I don't see anyone here saying that North Korea is a nice place to live. People are just pointing out that the day-to-day life for most people may not be the unyielding torment you imagine it to be.

Obviously, the human spirit can find times to laugh and smile even under the gravest of conditions... just look at soldiers in war.
It's all relative.
I don't think anyone is saying that it is "unyielding torment", however, certain things are unyielding, like the surveillance and monitoring from the government IF you step out of line, for example... the fact that at any minute a neighbor with a grudge can fabricate some story that results in you getting "re-educated", etc, etc, etc...

Compared to most of the countries in the world... it is bad.

Also, just for craps and giggles, have you guys ever seen the aerial photos of the two Koreas at night?

 

[Bamspeedy]

Do you consider all businessmen and engineers who work in the private sector to be members of this elite, or is it more a term for those who have high-level governmental jobs and who receive favoritism from the state on that basis?

In China 6% of the population is a member of the communist party, and these people are more than just those that serve in the military or have high level government jobs, and they can become owners of business and receive other favoritism from the state. If not a party member you could become an owner of a business as well, but often only if you bribe the local officials (if it's a larger business than merely being a street vendor). If the bribe gets too expensive or you fall out of favor with the party then your business will be deemed 'illegal' and your business will be shut down and sold to a more 'suitable' (favorable to the party) person.

Is NK any different? We don't know. Are the new NK business that are now 'private sector' from people starting their own businesses or is it companies that used to be run by the government merely transferring 'ownership' from the state to a favored local?

It certainly appears to be one based on the relative lack of luggage.

After you check your bags at an airport you just have your handbags left to carry around the terminal, before going through security and boarding the plane.

They seem to forget that 1 million South Koreans have traveled to one particular province to vacation since 1998.

Do you know the difference between a South Korean and North Korean to know if a picture is of a local or a tourist (such as the visitors to the restaurant, or some of the people on the beach)?

I think it is clear that American meddling in the affairs of Korea has made things far worse in the past 10 years.

But I thought NK was doing so well lately? Perhaps the effect of what Bush did is being exaggerated, like the exaggeration some Americans have of life in NK.

Using your estimate of 10% elite, that still leaves 2.9 million who are not.

10% is country wide. It could be a higher percentage in the capital, and much lower elsewhere, similar to other countries where the richest are more concentrated in certain parts than others.

the people of North Korea appear to be relatively happy and well-clothed from the few photos we now have.

I don't believe Kim would allow people to starve in the capital. No, I don't think many people in NK are starving to death like some areas of Africa. I want to know more about rural NK to better compare to other countries, anybody can build up their capital (or other military cities) to be high quality.

 

[NedimNapoleon]

But does S. Korea want reunification? If North Korea is on the brink of starvation and in such a bad state would reunification hurt South Korea economy? The factories and "businesses" from the North would collapse because they couldn't compete and the problem of feeding the population and employing it.

 

[Formaldehyde]

Is NK any different? We don't know. Are the new NK business that are now 'private sector' from people starting their own businesses or is it companies that used to be run by the government merely transferring 'ownership' from the state to a favored local?

Exactly. We just don't know with any degree of certainty because there has been a virtual wall created between NK and the West. Much of the criticism of NK is based on speculation of how other similar governments ostensibly worked. And that was based largely on remote criticisms of them, which may or may not have been accurate either.

Do you know the difference between a South Korean and North Korean to know if a picture is of a local or a tourist (such as the visitors to the restaurant, or some of the people on the beach)?

Do you know the difference? Aren't they exactly the same ethnic group for the most part with minor differences in height due to different nutrition and healthcare in some areas? Can that be easily be determined from photos? The men who still wear the all-black attire are fairly easy to distinguish, but most of the women in the cities now appear to dress just like their SK counterparts for the most part. And so do many of the men now.

But I thought NK was doing so well lately? Perhaps the effect of what Bush did is being exaggerated, like the exaggeration some Americans have of life in NK.

Who stated that "NK was doing so well lately"? I think it is clear that relations have thawed considerably between the two countries despite the efforts of GWB to deliberately change that. And that the private sector is now growing and providing a lot more decent paying jobs than before. But I certainly wouldn't characterize it as "doing so well lately". But it certainly appears to be making progress in the right direction. I see no reason why they shouldn't eventually grow economically exactly the same that China did, especially after Kim Jung-Il dies.

Do you think calling them the "axis of evil" and an "outpost of tyranny" had no lasting effect on relations and subsequent events? That it was "exaggerated" by many world leaders who openly criticized Bush for doing so, and that the repercussions aren't still felt even today?

Bush's 'Axis of Evil' Comes Back to Haunt United States

Nearly five years after President Bush introduced the concept of an "axis of evil" comprising Iraq, Iran and North Korea, the administration has reached a crisis point with each nation: North Korea has claimed it conducted its first nuclear test, Iran refuses to halt its uranium-enrichment program, and Iraq appears to be tipping into a civil war 3 1/2 years after the U.S.-led invasion.

In Bush's 2002 State of the Union address, a speech designed to shift the political debate from a battle against al-Qaeda to a possible confrontation with Iraq, the president mentioned North Korea, Iraq and Iran and declared: "States like these, and their terrorist allies, constitute an axis of evil, arming to threaten the peace of the world. By seeking weapons of mass destruction, these regimes pose a grave and growing danger. . . . In any of these cases, the price of indifference would be catastrophic."

All three issues came to a head in 2003: The United States invaded Iraq and discovered no weapons of mass destruction; North Korea began to obtain weapons-grade plutonium from fuel rods that had been under international observation; and Iran disclosed that it had made rapid progress with a previously secret uranium-enrichment program.

In contrast to its handling of Iraq, the administration has tried to resolve the North Korean and Iranian nuclear breakouts with diplomacy. But progress has been slow, in part because the United States has been reluctant to hold bilateral talks with either country except within the context of broader talks with other nations.

James B. Steinberg, President Bill Clinton's deputy national security adviser and now dean of the Lyndon B. Johnson School of Public Affairs at the University of Texas at Austin, said the North Korea test will raise a larger question that echoes Ronald Reagan's most famous 1980 campaign line -- "With respect to the axis of evil," Steinberg said, "are you better off today than you were four years ago? . . . It's clear that the answer is we're worse off with respect to the nuclear proliferation problem in both North Korea and Iran than four to six years ago, and I would argue we're worse off in our overall security because of the situation in Iraq."

All but a small minority of South Korean youths would apparently prefer to do nothing, or even support NK, if the US decided to invade their country, as suggested by the results of the poll I posted earlier in the thread. This is amazing in a country which has always been considered to be one of our staunchest allies no matter what our government does?

That was probably the most boneheaded diplomatic move ever made by a US president, and there have been numerous bad ones in the past.

I don't believe Kim would allow people to starve in the capital. No, I don't think many people in NK are starving to death like some areas of Africa. I want to know more about rural NK to better compare to other countries, anybody can build up their capital (or other military cities) to be high quality.

They certainly were starving in the early 90s when international aid was slow to arrive, except from South Koreans and UNICEF. The US didn't start providing any aid until 1997. And those efforts apparently caused relations to improve greatly between NK and SK as well as the US. China and SK are still the largest donors of food while GWB was criticized by many world leaders for using food as a weapon.

And that view continues to be pushed even today by talking heads at Fox News. Donald Rumsfeld even insists in this video that the starving people don't even receive the ongoing aid effort, while asking "Do you really want to help that regime stay in power"?

Fox News: Food as a 'Weapon' on North Korea?

But does S. Korea want reunification? If North Korea is on the brink of starvation and in such a bad state would reunification hurt South Korea economy? The factories and "businesses" from the North would collapse because they couldn't compete and the problem of feeding the population and employing it.

According to the poll I posted earlier, they want to reunify even more now than they did in the past.

 

[IglooDame]

They certainly were starving in the early 90s when international aid was slow to arrive, except from South Koreans and UNICEF. The US didn't start providing any aid until 1997. And those efforts apparently caused relations to improve greatly between NK and SK as well as the US. China and SK are still the largest donors of food while GWB was criticized by many world leaders for using food as a weapon.

And according to wiki (probably as accurate as any source regarding internal NK affairs), 1997 is when famine deaths hit their peak.

Interesting article here, too:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-11244825

 

[kochman]

Do you think calling them the "axis of evil" and an "outpost of tyranny" had no lasting effect on relations and subsequent events? That it was "exaggerated" by many world leaders who openly criticized Bush for doing so, and that the repercussions aren't still felt even today?

They are a huge sponsor of terrorism and definitely proliferate nuclear technology, the regime is evil.

They certainly were starving in the early 90s when international aid was slow to arrive, except from South Koreans and UNICEF. The US didn't start providing any aid until 1997. And those efforts apparently caused relations to improve greatly between NK and SK as well as the US. China and SK are still the largest donors of food while GWB was criticized by many world leaders for using food as a weapon.

Not to defend GW, because he was a clown... but why the hell should we be giving them food when they are a largely agrigarian society? Their leadership basically uses the rest of the world providing food as a way to subsidize further military spending and nuclear development...
He was absolutely right to cut off food... as was Clinton (because GW wasn't president all that time we weren't giving them ANY food... that was Clinton, etc).

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

They are a huge sponsor of terrorism

They are?

 

[Ajidica]

definitely proliferate nuclear technology,

Odd. I thought they were getting it from Iran, who we helped achieve nuclear development under the Shah.

 

[Traitorfish]

They are?

What, you've never seen Team America: World Police?

 

[kochman]

They are?

According to the State Department they were... but international talks with North Korea in February 2007 paved the way for the removal of North Korea from the list of State Sponsors of Terrorism. Part of the whole thing were we wanted them to stop playing bad in the sandbox.

Odd. I thought they were getting it from Iran, who we helped achieve nuclear development under the Shah.

By that, I mean, they are in violation of the (not signed by them) non-proliferation treaty.
Proliferation doesn't mean selling and trading, it means more developing.

The bottom line is, they are not a nice place... I don't see why we are nitpicking here. They get $$$ and food from other nations, and in turn use the resources they have to build their military and nuke technology, while their citizens starve.

Starve your citizens long enough, and you get a revolution... In order to not allow a sovereign nation to starve its own people, we are propping it up!
If there was a revolution, the two Koreas would likely re-unite.

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

According to the State Department they were... but international talks with North Korea in February 2007 paved the way for the removal of North Korea from the list of State Sponsors of Terrorism. Part of the whole thing were we wanted them to stop playing bad in the sandbox.

I don't care about State Department categories. Show me proof that they are supporting terrorism.

By that, I mean, they are in violation of the (not signed by them) non-proliferation treaty.
Proliferation doesn't mean selling and trading, it means more developing.

If they didn't sign it, then they're not in violation of it...

The bottom line is, they are not a nice place...

The part you seem to be missing is that no one has stated otherwise in this thread. You are tilting with windmills.

 

[kochman]

I don't care about State Department categories. Show me proof that they are supporting terrorism.

Ok, let me get my personal intelligence and espionage teams assembled and go get that for you. I'm on it.
Actually, I'll let my tax dollars fund it, and trust the gubbamint's designations, and not demand to see top secret information that could endanger who knows how many people... The others on the list are also pretty terrible places, I highly doubt that there was some secret conspiracy to put N Korea in the doghouse despite being well behaved.

If they didn't sign it, then they're not in violation of it...

Rejecting it makes them violators to begin with...
This treaty was certainly something you would recommend for the world, was it not?