←back to thread

207 points jimhi | 7 comments | | HN request time: 0.001s | source | bottom
Show context
warning26 ◴[] No.29828947[source]
Really interesting article!

On a related note, one oddity I often see online (and, once, in person) are the die-hard groups of westerners who insist that North Korea is actually a paradise on earth and any claim to the contrary is some kind of evil capitalist propaganda. Utterly baffling, when there are so many sources like this article indicating otherwise.

replies(5): >>29829115 #>>29829500 #>>29829516 #>>29830736 #>>29830801 #
decafninja ◴[] No.29829115[source]
I've seen this too. Their mantra is usually something along the lines of "don't believe everything you see in the corrupt Western/South Korean media".

What gives?

I can understand different countries have different pros and cons, different people value different things, and something an American might find unpalatable might not be considered so bad somewhere else.

But North Korea seems to stand out as being one of very few countries that has no redeeming qualities whatsoever. Odd that anyone who wasn't born there would willingly and voluntarily pledge their allegiance to such a regime.

replies(2): >>29829297 #>>29829528 #
lisper ◴[] No.29829297[source]
My guess is that most of the people who profess to believe that everything in the DPRK is hunky dory are on the extreme political left. The right does not have a monopoly on crazy people.
replies(2): >>29829445 #>>29830114 #
trasz ◴[] No.29830114[source]
How is North Korea left? It's an absolute monarchy, pretty much exactly the other side of the political compass.
replies(5): >>29830230 #>>29830359 #>>29830512 #>>29830780 #>>29833442 #
1. lisper ◴[] No.29830512[source]
That is, empirically, where forms of government commonly labelled as "left" ends up when taken to extremes. North Korea is just the most extreme example.
replies(1): >>29831411 #
2. sudosysgen ◴[] No.29831411[source]
Yeah, bullshit. What other "left" government ended up with a hereditary monarchy?
replies(1): >>29834202 #
3. lisper ◴[] No.29834202[source]
You're right, left-wing dictatorships tend not to be hereditary. NK is unique in this regard.
replies(1): >>29834471 #
4. bernawil ◴[] No.29834471{3}[source]
NK is really the odd one there with the hereditary thing and all. Almost all other communist "dictatorships" are really not that different from US style corporations. Basically, organizations staffed by common people jockeying for position. Sometimes climbing the ladder on merit, sometimes politicking but you get the point. Being family with the CEO helps proably as much as being family with the head of the politburo.

And if you think about it, how much of American culture in the 20th century was a result of things that came out of corporate boards?

replies(1): >>29834486 #
5. dragonwriter ◴[] No.29834486{4}[source]
> NK is really the odd one there with the hereditary thing and all. Almost all other communist "dictatorships" are really not that different from US style corporations.

Wait, are you saying equity ownership and therefore control, of “US style corporations” isn't inheritable?

replies(1): >>29834622 #
6. bernawil ◴[] No.29834622{5}[source]
I'm saying public companies -as in trading in the stock market- (and to a lesser extent private ones too) and corporate culture is very similar to communist government.

Schumpeter said something in the lines of "it's ironic that in democratic free-market countries most economic activity happens under hierarchical top-down organizations".

replies(1): >>29835683 #
7. dragonwriter ◴[] No.29835683{6}[source]
> Schumpeter said something in the lines of “it’s ironic that in democratic free-market countries most economic activity happens under hierarchical top-down organizations”.

It’s only even slightly ironic if you ignore that “free-market” is the capitalist euphemism for a society whose structure is top-to-bottom regulated (largely, through the exact shape of the imposed definition of “property rights”) around principals engineered and fought for tooth-and-nail over centuries by the capitalist (née mercantile) class to allow their heirarchical top-down organizations to replace those of the feudal aristocracy as the main driving force in society.