this post was submitted on 23 Dec 2023
352 points (95.6% liked)
Asklemmy
43956 readers
941 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- [email protected]: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I completely missed this comment, sorry.
Yeah, they are definitely restrictive with tourists, but that's not the same as how citizens live. Your story sounds more extreme than others I have seen (where the general consensus is more generically that the visit was "on rails"), but I'm not about to call your buddy a liar. Citizens, it probably won't surprise you to know, are not moved around in windowless vans (beyond the case of arrest, where I imagine they might be since that would be pretty normal for most countries).
No worries.
From his description, his experience was very "on rails" too, but just including cases where the "rails" very conspicuously were making it so he couldn't see what was going on around him.
But this doesn't really answer my question. I'm not saying his experience matches that of a citizen or even that it was accurate. I have no idea I wasn't there. In fact, it was kind of the exact opposite and that it being "on rails" and only being able to see what they wanted him to see, probably is not at all what citizens live. Kind of the point that they were trying to hide how citizens live.
Which leads me back to my question again. . .you claim we have it all wrong, and my good friend's experience kind of confirms (as much as he was allowed to) how secretive and weird they are. . .so where is your claim coming from and what is it based on?
The DPRK is in an unusual and tenuous position, and there is very little that can be usefully gained from speculation that doesn't involve considering that. At the same time as trying to develop a [dictatorship of the proletariat/highly unusual set of political economic arrangements], they bear constant acts of sabotage from the South and the US that are at times extraordinarily depraved, have endured sanctions for decades, and suffered from regional poverty since long before the WPK took over, all the more so after the US bombed them back into the stone age.
Given this context, and probably also the Otto Warmbier incident, we can begin to understand why they would be vigilant -- some would say hypervigilant -- towards various security issues, and don't want some jackass tourist going rogue and causing an international incident. Since they never made a ton of money from tourism -- especially discounting Chinese tourism -- sacrificing some level of profitability to their tourism industry to keep tourists on a short leash and prevent incidents isn't so inexplicable.
Complete aside, what nationality is your tourist friend? I assume not American because -- due to US passport law -- it is very difficult for a US citizen to gain access to the DPRK since the Warmbier incident.
Of course the DPRK is strange, even its most ardent supporters would tell you so, but the fact of the matter is that what westerners think about the DPRK isn't "The DPRK is weird", it's "This is a completely backwards place with absurd laws and propaganda which considers human life worthless," right? "State propaganda says the Kims don't shit and Kim Il-Sung invented the hamburger. Kim Jong-Un had his uncle eaten alive by dogs for being rude to him. The rats eat the kids and the kids eat the rats." etc. My biggest point of emphasis is that every one of those stories, which have agglomerated together to create the hazy cultural consensus that I mentioned, is unambiguously false and you have very little left that you've ever actually seen about the DPRK if you subtract all of that.
Here are some things to look at if you like. Obviously I would not tell you to take anything uncritically and I have my own issues with things here and there. I'd be happy to discuss any of them.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/oct/13/why-do-north-korean-defector-testimonies-so-often-fall-apart
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3V4Hnl7J9H4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2BO83Ig-E8E
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IBqeC8ihsO8
And of course, you can actually look at statements that they put out:
http://kcna.kp/en/article/q/5a9ffe6e4d6704ac1838b14785365295.kcmsf
Or the fact that the Korea-watching industry is just completely shameless about putting out the most harebrained nonsense with very little pushback (including things that don't make it to the headlines), which really does not lend credibility to the idea of serious-minded criticism of the DPRK having any strong presence in anglophone media and therefore anglophone culture. On this point, because it is a "death by a thousand cuts" situation, it's really just a question of how many examples you want.