[PEN-L:27353] Re: Re: TV and income disparity

["Michael Hoover" <hooverm@xxxxxxxxxx>]

>>> jdevine@xxxxxxx 06/28/02 13:10 PM >>>
I wrote so the political monopoly of the North Korean communist party and its planning efforts had nothing to do with it?
Kim il and his son had nothing to do with it?

Louis' answer (see below) isn't really an answer. He seemed to be blaming _all_ of North Korea's plight on imperialism, on external events and systems. I would say that imperialism has been a major or even _the_ major cause of NK's problems, especially after the fall of the old Soviet Union and the drying up of aid & protection from them. But I asked if it's
possible that the self-appointed and self-perpetuating elite (or ruling stratum) of NK helped to create those problems.

His response is to quote some fine stuff by Marty Hart-Landsburg that I've read before, that says up to 1965 or so, NK was doing really well (at least
according to the standards of industrialization, ignoring issues of democracy and the like). That doesn't say anything about how NK did after
1965 or so. It also doesn't deal with the relative role (or non-role) of internal and external forces.

if we want to understand NK's problems, it's a mistake to simplylook at external causes, especially when the people there don't seem to have any control over their government: remember that power corrupts unless those
who wield it are held responsible democratically. (How else could the leadership of the country be passed to Kim il Sung's son, in imitation of a feudal lord?)
Jim Devine
<<<>>>

recycled pulp musings from several years
ago on another list...

North Koreans' admiration for Kim stemmed
from his composure under US bombing that
left separated families, widows, orphans,
disabled in its wake (about 25% of NK
population was killed and another 50% was
wounded). In immediate aftermath of 1953
armistice, Kim gov't undertook determined
economic planning that succeeded in steady
improvement of people's lives for about 2
decades (heavy defense burden would be
factor in eventual development lag).
Irrespective of later Kim-worship
- emergence of which coincides, not
coincidentally I think, with onset
of economic stagnation in late
1960s/early 1970s - not hard to
understand why folks might have praised
him.

NK continued to outperform SK until
mid-1970s in terms of per capita
economic growth and until early 1980s
in terms of per capita material
production. Moreover, North was more
successful than South in crop production
until recently despite more fertile
arable land in latter (NK was exporting
considerable amount of agricultural
products into early 1990s). Prior to
floods of several years ago, visitors
to North reported that basic food,
clothing, housing, medical care,
education needs were met even as they
noted lack of 'consumer' variety.

Large investment in machine processing
and metal processing helped NK transform
from war-decimated agricultural country
into relatively strong industrial state
in short period of time. Continued high
rates of investment in heavy industry
eventually resulted in stagnation and
problems with, among other things,
housing and public transportation
conditions (too little attention to road
paving, for example).

SK's post-1960s economy (hardly model of
free market capitalism given preponderant
role of state in economic management)
benefitted from earlier period of massive
US & UN aid used to run country throughout
1950s, US & Japanese technology transfers
that began in 1960s, and preferential
access to US markets in 1970s. And
'economic miracle' was - surprise,
surprise - grossly unequal, characterized
by high urban unemployment & shantytowns,
poor social services & education in rural
areas, widespread prostitution (common to
US military occupation everywhere).

Post-war strength of 'self-reliance'
ideology among North Koreans resulted
from trauma of US bombing (as would be
case later in Vietnam, more bombs were
dropped on NK than on all of Europe
during WW2) that destroyed almost all
above-ground structures and either
killed or wounded about 75% of population.
Pretty strong basis for acceptance
of 'juche.'

NK economic 'disaster' manifested itself
in 1990s following decade of 'flexible &
practical self-reliance' (as policy has
been called) which meant attempts to
increase foreign trade, direct foreign
investment, joint ventures, tourism, &
cooperation with South Korea.

Hmmm... Michael Hoover