
A Lot of What You Know About North Korea Is Racist Nonsense - devy
https://medium.com/defiant/a-lot-of-what-you-know-about-north-korea-is-racist-nonsense-a625256b51cc
======
grecy
I am traveling in West Africa right now, and the same applies to this part of
the world.

This place is very, very different from that portrayed by the Western Media.

I was sitting in the Nigerian Embassy waiting for a visa, and an American tv
show was on.. NCIS or something, and they had these American "heros" over in
some African hell-hole saving the world.. of course they get attacked and then
work hard to survive and find their way to some place. People are being
dragged out of cars, men smashed in the face by the butt end of AK47s, women
thrown to the ground. People's eyes show pure hatred - enough to actually
scare me, even though I was just watching TV.

The show was set in Mali, they were supposedly in Bamako.

The kicker?

I was sitting in Bamako that very moment, having spent over a month there
already, walking around every day, on my own, perfectly safe and happy. I even
walked around at night multiple times. People would say hello and invite me
into their homes.

The reality is that I met hundreds and hundreds of the kindest, friendliest
and happiest people I have ever met in Bamako, yet millions of Americans are
seeing realistic looking images that it's a complete hell hole.

I have driven through more than 500 road blocks in 10 countries in West
Africa, and I have never, ever seen anything remotely scary or threatening.
Not even once.

It's simply not true. It's fake.

When Africans see super heros flying around New York saving us from Aliens
they know it's not real. When Americans see African Hell holes on TV, they
have no idea it's not real. They are being lied to en-mass and have no idea.

(if it makes any difference, I'm white, and driving a not-cheap Jeep around
Africa)

~~~
wyldfire
I've never been to Africa, so my perspective has likely been tainted by media
and entertainment programs like the ones you describe.

How often did you travel to rural parts of Mali? Is it as safe as Bamako?

> ... I met hundreds and hundreds of the kindest, friendliest and happiest
> people...

Over the years, I've learned that most people from most places are sane,
regular people just trying to make their way in the world. People from Iran,
North Korea, Russia, China, Afghanistan, Tibet, Venezuela -- they're just
regular folks like you and me. They get up in the morning, go to work, try to
have a good time with friends/family in the evenings.

If we were to hold up a mirror and try to judge ourselves based on the
outlandish things people do and say that end up being worth news coverage, I
think we'd feel some dread about where we live too.

~~~
ptaipale
> People from Iran, North Korea, Russia, China, Afghanistan, Tibet, Venezuela
> -- they're just regular folks like you and me

Of course. However, the environment where they live may not be so regular. Of
course it often surprises you when your expectations and prejudices aren't
based on real experience, but crazy regimes make people also behave in crazy
ways.

Remember the idolatry around Pavel Morozov, for instance.

------
tcoppi
This article ignores the fact that the stated goal of the NK Regime is
reunification of the peninsula(under their rule, of course), and that they
were the ones that started the war to achieve that goal in the 50s.

------
jrhurst
"U.S. propaganda can dismiss North Korea’s legitimate concerns so easily
because of the underlying racist assumption that these are a bizarre and
simple-minded people that believe in things like unicorns. This feeds off of
and into orientalist logic that sees East Asians as a nearly subhuman “other”
that can’t be reasoned with and so must be handled with force."

I don't particularly see this logic with Vietnamese, Chinese, South Koreans,
Japan. At least in the particular context of military action. In fact, most of
the articles I end up reading about Japanese, South Korean, or Chinese
responses to what North Korea is doing at the current time.

That said, I think there is a big role of racism to play when North Korea is
used as a fear tactic during political cycles locally. But maybe everything is
just about America and I'm wrong here.

~~~
wyldfire
The "US propaganda" that I see and hear regarding PRK is almost _always_
regarding the cult of personality of the Supreme Leader. I don't think I've
ever seen anything that would lead me to believe that its people are simple-
minded.

The thing that puzzles me is, as in any dictatorship -- why does the military
enforce the unjust rule? Is it that they don't see the plight of their people,
they don't care, or they're enriched by the status quo and can't imagine
disrupting it? Or something else entirely?

And why do the Chinese continue to support this state? Is it because of a
belief in the ideology? Or a perpetual bargaining chip with the US?

~~~
dragonwriter
> The thing that puzzles me is, as in any dictatorship -- why does the
> military enforce the unjust rule?

Self-interest (in the most case, individual, on the part of each actor.) As in
any dictatorship.

> Is it that they don't see the plight of their people, they don't care, or
> they're enriched by the status quo and can't imagine disrupting it?

They see the plight of their people, and don't want to join it, and even
moreso don't want to be (along with potentially their family) killed when any
one of the many co-conspirators they would need to do something about it turns
out to be a regime loyalist who scuttles the plan before it kicks off.

> And why do the Chinese continue to support this state?

Because they don't want a united Korea, and even moreso don't want a US (and
Japan)-allied united Korea on their border. The DPRK is an alternative focus
for China's global and regional rivals attention.

------
scandox
> The North Koreans are dangerous because they refuse to submit to our
> imperial authority and play ball with our global order.

Like it or loathe it, this is the problem.

------
ptaipale
Media has its own image of things, yes. I've verified that in many places
where what you see on the ground is substantially different from what you see
on CNN.

But so does this piece, when it is referring to the U.S. armed forces: "still
technically at war with them and poised to invade at moment’s notice."

Hardly poised to invade at moment's notice. There is no such capacity to
attack quickly. The U.S. is there and together with South Korean forces, able
to respond to fire, and perform limited airstrikes, but there is nothing that
would realistically be useful for an actual invasion of North Korea.

The article makes it a big thing that DPRK has no real capability to attack
the U.S. using ballistic missiles. It does not make a big thing that DPRK
loudly and repeatedly announces it has such a capability. Or that it has
repeatedly used so-called unconventional methods, such as murdering people on
the shopping concourse in other countries. [0] I don't consider it an
exaggeration to expect that they might try things like packing a nuclear bomb
in a freight ship that then attacks a coastal city of a perceived enemy.

That is quite clearly the reason that it is considered as somewhat crazy, or
at least unstable and unpredictable.

I am not much worried about DPRK launching a nuclear attack against Western
countries in the short term, but thinks like the recent threats against
Australia [1], [2] don't make it any easier to accept them as harmless.

Their Twitter feed [3] makes a rather disconcerting read.

[0] [https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/feb/14/kim-jong-un-
ha...](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/feb/14/kim-jong-un-half-brother-
reportedly-killed-malaysia-north-korea)

[1] kcna.co.jp/item/2017/201704/news21/20170421-29ee.html

[2] [http://www.news.com.au/world/asia/north-korea-threatens-
aust...](http://www.news.com.au/world/asia/north-korea-threatens-australia-
with-nuclear-strike-over-us-allegiance/news-
story/fa28ccb9eaaff6c02f5c12bdc19bc227)

[3] [https://twitter.com/dprk_news](https://twitter.com/dprk_news)

~~~
rendall
"Their twitter feed": DPRK_News is a parody account by Ken White of Popehat.

~~~
ptaipale
Right, thanks. In this case I can't tell difference between parody and the
actual statements by DPRK News.

~~~
rendall
Indeed. You're not alone. Even journalists have quoted it. Poe's Law is strong
with that one.

------
notacoward
What a huge strawman. Most people do not, as the author claims, believe that
North Koreans in general are irrational, stupid, warlike, etc. They believe
that the North Korean _leadership_ has most of those qualities, which is
pretty well proven. Unable to counter that, the author chooses to "disprove"
that which is never claimed. As jrhurst has already pointed out, this supposed
"orientalism" doesn't seem to exist for Viet Nam, China, or even South Korea.
I'm not going to say there's no such thing as anti-Asian discrimination or
even outright racism in the US, but we don't fear nations that aren't led by
provably-insane coddled children of past dictators,.

~~~
JBSay
Assuming that your enemy is crazy is just intellectual lazyness. If you can't
explain the behaviour of your enemy then it's probably because your
understanding of his motives is lacking.

~~~
notacoward
_Assuming_ that your enemy is crazy is intellectual laziness. However, there
really are crazy people in the world. Some occupy positions of power. Do you
deny either part of that? When the craziness is _thoroughly proven_ it's not
lazy to recognize it. You know what _is_ lazy? Assuming that someone's _not_
crazy, or assuming that an interlocutor is jumping to conclusions. Turn that
lens on yourself first, not last.

~~~
awptimus
"Crazy" suffices to say that the behavior set is far outside of regular norms
as to be unworkable with normal reason. It doesn't have to imply the actor is
schizophrenic or anything.

It doesn't matter if the actor, behaving rationally towards his ends, has ends
that are absolutely incompatible with ours, or if he's acting irrationally.
[edit: I mean it doesn't matter from a defense of his behavior standpoint.
It's fine to call him "crazy" if his ends are absolutely unacceptable]

I agree with the critique of the piece - no one thinks North Koreans are
inferior as human beings. We think they've been fed a ubiquitous dose of
propaganda their entire lives. We think that a dictator, so very isolated
through years of behavior that necessitates (and invites) it, lacks any sense
of acceptable end-states for his country.

I also agree that it's misguided to dismiss him as actually crazy. One must
treat him as a rational actor - moves you make will have moves he makes. There
is rationality involved. May be shitty rationality, may be myopic rationality,
but it's rationality. You move warships towards North Korea he's not going
going to launch Rubber Ducks at you. That'd be crazy. He's not going to poop
his pants and eat the feces on live television and announce he's a little
princess.

~~~
notacoward
Don't try the "excluded middle" trick on me. Rationality is not an all-or-
nothing proposition. Literally nobody is 100% rational or 100% irrational. The
question is where the balance lies; "crazy" is an apt term for someone who is
only rational in limited ways or for a small percentage of the time.

~~~
awptimus
I ain't try any trick yo

------
542458
While it's true that the media overplays how volatile NK is (mostly by acting
like saber-rattling has any reasonable chance of devolving into full-scale
war), let's not act like their administration is ran by reasonable people
either.

Remember that according to KN Kim Jong-il's birth caused a new star to appear
in the sky and the season to miraculously change from winter to summer, and
never needs to defecate. This is also the same country that is home to some of
the worst human rights violations in the world and keeps their dissidents in
concentration camps.

Painting them as innocent and reasonable feels like a bit of a stretch.

------
thrw2009
There is Russian article about this. Not sure how 'fake news' it is, but seems
to have many details and numbers.

[https://eadaily.com/en/news/2017/04/12/nuclear-kim-armed-
dem...](https://eadaily.com/en/news/2017/04/12/nuclear-kim-armed-democracy-
against-helpless-totalitarianism)

------
carsongross
Having resigned myself in most international matters to narrative collapse, a
post-modern inability to determine the relative truthfulness, completeness or
meaning of conflicting narratives, I offer only the following content:

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T4rfHAqs9EI](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T4rfHAqs9EI)

------
rendall
In the author's own words, in a comment to his own article: "I don’t claim to
be an expert or even that well-read on the subject." In context, the "subject"
he refers to appears to be "North Korea."

------
pjkundert
Stopped reading at "war-horny bigot like Trump". I'd rather invest time in an
even-handed analysis of the situation...

------
EGreg
The article is not wrong. We had a real chance to negotiate a roadmap towards
a real peace agreement with NK, and end its nuclear program, but as usual the
_Republicans_ were against it. After all, if NK disarms then we don't get to
bomb a country of "others" (Communists, Shiites etc.) who are against our
ideological preferences. And that would be a shame.

As usual the bonehead Repiblicans under Clinton, and later the disastrous
George W Bush administration preferred to save a buck and reneg on the Agreed
Framework, instead having their children spend 100 bucks and people's lives go
up in smoke in what might be the first nuclear war since WW2.

[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agreed_Framework](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agreed_Framework)

 _" Soon after the agreement was signed, U.S. Congress control changed to the
Republican Party, who did not support the agreement.[16][17] Some Republican
Senators were strongly against the agreement, regarding it as
appeasement.[18][19] Initially U.S. Department of Defense emergency funds not
under Congress control were used to fund the transitional oil supplies under
the agreement,[20] together with international funding. From 1996 Congress
provided funding, though not always sufficient amounts.[11][21] Consequently,
some of the agreed transitional oil supplies were delivered late.[22] KEDO's
first director, Stephen Bosworth, later commented "The Agreed Framework was a
political orphan within two weeks after its signature".[23]

Some analysts believe North Korea agreed to the freeze primarily because of
the U.S. agreement to phase out economic sanctions that had been in place
since the Korean War. But because of congressional opposition, the U.S. failed
to deliver on this part of the agreement.[24]"

"As late as the end of 2003, North Korea claimed that it would freeze its
nuclear program in exchange for additional American concessions, but a final
agreement was not reached. North Korea withdrew from the Nuclear Non-
Proliferation Treaty in 2003."_

However keep in mind that NK already helped Syria build a NUCLEAR WEAPONS
FACILITY in 2006, which Israel had discovered and successfully destroyed.

[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Orchard](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Orchard)

