Trump Thread

[Husar]

There's no need to personalize this. Of course Kim wants to develop his country. So did his father, and so would almost anyone else in his position. It would make his reign more secure, at least for a while. The one thing preventing this is international sanctions.

Then why does the country ban citizens from using the internet even if they can? They're actively hunting people with internet-capable mobile phones from China. Doesn't sound like a "wants to develop the country" and neither does the whole narrative that anyone from outside is an enemy. It would be weird if his father wanted the country to open up but actually sealed it off from the outside in practice. I don't think it's just the sanctions. The point of sealing off was likely to get full control over the information that circulates inside. It seems possible that KJU wants to change that to some extent, very slowly.
And why not personalize this? Dictators aren't one-dimensional people, or are they?

Gilrandir, no, not really.

[Montmorency]

Then why does the country ban citizens from using the internet even if they can? They're actively hunting people with internet-capable mobile phones from China. Doesn't sound like a "wants to develop the country" and neither does the whole narrative that anyone from outside is an enemy. It would be weird if his father wanted the country to open up but actually sealed it off from the outside in practice. I don't think it's just the sanctions. The point of sealing off was likely to get full control over the information that circulates inside. It seems possible that KJU wants to change that to some extent, very slowly.
And why not personalize this? Dictators aren't one-dimensional people, or are they?

Gilrandir, no, not really.

Yes, it isn't surprising that the government would prefer to control media access. So do Russia and China (!!!!). The job is just narrower and simpler for now in North Korea. If North Korea can't open on its own terms, then the regime can't guarantee its own continued existence; they're not interested in experiencing 19th-century style economic "diplomacy".Would be pretty silly to abandon this small advantage and subsidize Internet and media access while violence and starvation are rampant, like if Gorbachev had declared in 1985 that each SSR could be as autonomous as they wished.

But ROK and Western media have become pervasive in North Korea for years. The government is well aware of the phenomenon, and permits the privileged, wealthy and powerful to 'indulge' with relatively few restrictions, whereas commoners with USBs or DVDs will be arbitrarily cracked down on to inspire terror. Remember, dictators don't make people clap for a long time (simply) because they like to be applauded, it's one of many interlocking mechanisms of control. One of the most effective means of control is to condition people into imposing self-control.

And the country was not sealed off; remember the Axis of Evil? Here's an overview of EU sanctions over time, which in recent years have escalated to include total investment bans. It was indeed sealed in, except to China and Russia. (I think in one of the articles linked in the thread, it was mentioned that 90% of DPRK trade is with China; we all know by now of the North Korean labor camps in Siberia.) And surprisingly, certain EU governments and organizations.

[Husar]

And the country was not sealed off; remember the Axis of Evil? Here's an overview of EU sanctions over time, which in recent years have escalated to include total investment bans. It was indeed sealed in, except to China and Russia.

So how many North Korean tourists are currently officially vacationing in China and Russia?

[Montmorency]

So how many North Korean tourists are currently officially vacationing in China and Russia?

The elites, perhaps.

What's your point? As you know, neoliberal "opening" refers to capitalized direct investment and technology transfer, not "helping people live better lives"; citizens of opening countries only mattter in terms of human capital and market relations. And North Korea doesn't exactly prioritize the leisure and health of its citizens.

Every worker gets 15 days of vacation per year. The government has a list of destinations they recommend. But, unless it’s a highly attractive resort or summerhouse, they don’t make a trip to go there. Most people spend their holidays at home. Sometimes people would visit their hometown or go on a trip, but this costs a lot of money and only people who can afford it do that. Students are the people who have the most fun on holidays. They gather together to share food and dance together afterwards.

At least the Soviet Union had sponsored trips and Black Sea beaches.

They have acoustic guitars in North Korea though. I wonder if they play Deep Purple?

[Husar]

The elites, perhaps.

What's your point? As you know, neoliberal "opening" refers to capitalized direct investment and technology transfer, not "helping people live better lives"; citizens of opening countries only mattter in terms of human capital and market relations. And North Korea doesn't exactly prioritize the leisure and health of its citizens.

The point is that any opening is a step in the right direction, even if it is less than one would hope for.
And that I like to play devil's advocate when I see everyone come to the same reflexive conclusion about something without even considering potential alternatives. And that maybe "he's a madman, so duh!" is not a sufficiently complex explanation for me in every case. And when has this ever led to a solution anyway? We need more 4D chess.

[rory_20_uk]

Dialogue is a move in the right direction - whoever started it. Even if that is the guy who criticised others for doing the same thing, tore up one agreement that had been signed and saluted an enemy general.

In the "spheres of influence" where there's China, Japan, South Korea and currently the USA along with North Korea there is no clear shared outcome so I don't see things being solved any time soon.

[Montmorency]

The point is that any opening is a step in the right direction, even if it is less than one would hope for.
And that I like to play devil's advocate when I see everyone come to the same reflexive conclusion about something without even considering potential alternatives. And that maybe "he's a madman, so duh!" is not a sufficiently complex explanation for me in every case. And when has this ever led to a solution anyway? We need more 4D chess.

Was it necessary and relevant though? To my recall no one in the Backroom has discussed these issues from the premise that Kim is a madman. I'm pretty sure I and others have explicitly rejected this narrative.

[Husar]

Was it necessary and relevant though? To my recall no one in the Backroom has discussed these issues from the premise that Kim is a madman. I'm pretty sure I and others have explicitly rejected this narrative.

Maybe I've misread something or got distracted by the media coverage and comments I've seen.