Entry details

Curzon
Author

Curzon

Date

February 6th, 2010

Tags

, ,

Comments

12 Comments so far.
Add yours.

Kim Jong-il’s regime is even weirder and more despicable than you thought

Or so says Christopher Hitchens in a compelling piece in Slate on North Korea. Part reminiscence, part reconsidertion, and part book review, Hitchens praises the book The Cleanest Race: How North Koreans See Themselves and Why It Matters, recently written by B.R. Myers, in which Hitchens repeats Myer’s theory that communism in North Korea is dead—its most recent constitution drops all mention of the word and there is no dictatorship of the proletariat. Instead, Pyongyang operates like a textbook fascist totalitarian government, maintained by slave labor, and based on racism and xenophobia. (Ironically, many of the principles may be carried over from Japanese imperialism.)

I think the population’s ignorance about their state of affairs is overblown, and I don’t think that Hitchens’ one racist, xenophobic tour guide is quite as representative of the population as he claims to think, and I think that in the past few years the people of the DPRK have learned that their government is dirt poor compared to their southern neighbor. (The country recently backtracked on its currency devaluation after it unleashed public outrage, a mighty rare occurrance.) But that’s about the only point of optimism in the Korea.

Hitchens’ article is titled A Nation of Racist Dwarfs, and the reason is clear only at the end of the article:

Here are the two most shattering facts about North Korea. First, when viewed by satellite photography at night, it is an area of unrelieved darkness. Barely a scintilla of light is visible even in the capital city. Second, a North Korean is on average six inches shorter than a South Korean. You may care to imagine how much surplus value has been wrung out of such a slave, and for how long, in order to feed and sustain the militarized crime family that completely owns both the country and its people.

But this is what proves Myers right. Unlike previous racist dictatorships, the North Korean one has actually succeeded in producing a sort of new species. Starving and stunted dwarves, living in the dark, kept in perpetual ignorance and fear, brainwashed into the hatred of others, regimented and coerced and inculcated with a death cult: This horror show is in our future, and is so ghastly that our own darling leaders dare not face it and can only peep through their fingers at what is coming.

I think the last line is interesting coming from Hitchens, a left-wing radical who supported advocated invading Iraq on the grounds that the civilized nations of the world will inevitably have to face off against such a tyrant, and that it was better to do so on our terms. He stops short of advocating a strike on North Korea, but the dreaded implication is that we are going to have to deal with the fallout from North Korea’s tragic situation at some point, and the legacy will likely be with us for a century or more.

Comments to this entry

Graham
February 6, 2010
5:52 pm
I don't think you can reasonably call Hitchens a "left-wing radical" anymore. The left is mad at him for have supported Iraq in the first place, and the right mistrusts him for everything he used to write, when he was Gore Vidal's 'heir apparent'. He's one of the last true examples of an iconoclast out there.

One of the things I respect most about Hitchens is his complete willingness to change his mind. For a time, he supported waterboarding and declared it to by no means be torture. Then he met up with some guys from the US SERE training course, and had them waterboard him. "If waterboarding isn't torture," he wrote afterwards, "I don't know what is" (this was in Vanity Fair a couple years ago, I can try and find a link). Anyways, Hitchens' main deal these days is halting the spread and existence of tyranny, cliched as that sounds.
Curzon
February 6, 2010
6:33 pm
Doesn't Hitchens still describe himself as a radical?

I love him on the opening moments of this circa 2006 video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=at8kdzJdrjs
dj
February 6, 2010
8:17 pm
Hey, that CNN clip is one of my earliest memories of Hitchens.

Here is his latest in Newsweek about why he hates sports
http://www.newsweek.com/id/233007?from=rss&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+newsweek%2FTopNews+%28UPDATED+-+Newsweek+Top+Stories%29
wren
February 6, 2010
8:29 pm
Why should we be the ones to clean out the cage that the Kim family created for their slaves back in 1946? Surely the South Koreans don't want a war of liberation right next door. Somehow someway they want to North Koreans to grow those missing six inches (literally and figuratively) by themselves; they want to muddle along. We really have no say in the matter. It's their call. Just as it is for the Iranians and Chinese and Burmese and.........
Chris Swanson
February 6, 2010
8:34 pm
Hitchens may or may not think of himself as a radical. I can see that going either way. I certainly don't see him as being particularly left-wing, though if he is, he's rather like a hawkish Democrat more than anything else.
M-Bone
February 6, 2010
9:17 pm
Hitchens is neither left nor right, but a studied contrarian. We love and/or hate him for it.
McKellar
February 6, 2010
9:41 pm
What do people think of his idea of a 'functioning' Orwellian state? Is it possible for the people of a nation to actually believe their propaganda? I thought human incredulity, cynicism, and parochial intransigence, not to mention outright idiocy, would always keep the bulk of a population from buying into any kind of ideological program.

If so, what would another war with North Korea be like? How does that ideology play out on the battlefield?
M-Bone
February 6, 2010
11:18 pm
"How does that ideology play out on the battlefield? "

I've been a bit hard on Meyers elsewhere on the internets. I like the book as a propaganda read, but don't believe that he offers anything to bridge the gap between cultural/literary scholarship and policy/strategy advice and I think that it should all be taken with a grain of salt.

http://ampontan.wordpress.com/2010/01/29/close-but-no-cigar/#comment-21497

My relevant comments -

On propaganda -

Myers - “But no regime would go to such enormous expense, year in, year out for sixty years, to inculcate into its citizens a worldview to which it did not itself subscribe.”

Me - This is an example of the tenuous logic of the argument – NK propaganda is expensive, therefore the elite must believe it, therefore we can use it as the primary means of understanding their behavior. There is no qualitative or quantitative evidence offered to indicate that Kim or others believe the propaganda that they produce or act according to its principles, and yet Myers expects his arguments to be used to guide policy.

Myers - “While ignoring North Korean ideology, the West has assiduously, almost compulsively, added to its pile of “hard” information on the country. Much of this has come from experts in nuclear or economic studies… Hard facts cannot be put to proper use unless one first acquires information of a very different nature.”

Me - Myers is flat out arguing that any study of the NK economy or nuclear program is “unusable” without his ideological arguments, which I believe rest on a series of generalizations and tenuous networks of causation.

On Hitchens - I love the guy, but I evaluate his statements by using a different standard that I use to evaluate those of Myers -

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tRBrjt7z5Cw&feature=related

So rightwing Christianity is like fascism and the North Koreans are also like fascism so I guess that the North Koreans are also like rightwing Christianity. And this tells us what exactly?

Getting a rise out of us shouldn't overwhelm what we already know about North Korea - It sucks to be there. They are scary. Should be approached with pragmatic caution. We don't need WWII era comparisons to see that a dictatorships usually suck.
M-Bone
February 6, 2010
11:26 pm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5INo7W2P-Jk&feature=related

Hitches gets mad mileage out of NK - argues if there were a god it would be like living in North Korea.
Chris
February 7, 2010
9:21 pm
This is a great documentary on North Korea - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FJ6E3cShcVU.

North Korea is a great example of how easily conventional thought can be manipulated. Now, if someone were to plant a voice in that statue...
traeh
February 8, 2010
3:37 am
M-Bone said, "Hitches gets mad mileage out of NK - argues if there were a god it would be like living in North Korea. "

God would only be like living in North Korea if God were omniscient and omnipotent. A.N. Whitehead's process theology conceives God as having a number of superlative characteristics, but neither omniscience nor omnipotence. Whitehead argues that omniscience and omnipotence of God would make human freedom a mere illusion. If God knows everything, then God knows in advance what one will decide to do at any given moment. But if the results of human decision-making processes are always known in advance, then they weren't real decision processes. They were illusions. Freedom becomes an illusion. But Whitehead argues one should conceive God as not knowing in advance what we will do, therefore as a non-omniscient God. Thus Hitchens is apparently mistaken to say the existence of God would be totalitarian like North Korea. An omniscient and omnipotent God seems to be more a theological construct, an abstract hypothesis, than something based in spiritual or religious experience. Experience of the sacred, of the divine can be had without anything in that experience requiring that one conceive God as fully omniscient or omnipotent.
SaskatoonMark
February 8, 2010
4:38 pm
Hitchens reminds us that there will be no happy ending to North Korea. Let's take the best-case scenario, which would be peaceful reunification of the Koreas, roughly akin to the reunification of Germany. At least the East Germans were mildly prosperous and aware of what was happening in the West; the North Koreans are not. How would a reunified Korea function? How would Seoul stop millions of northerners from marching south? How many decades would pass until North Koreans were worldly enough to vote in Korean elections?

South Koreans that I've talked to are idealistic about reunification, but are they willing to shoulder decades of high taxes that would be necessary to subsidize the North until it attains a South Korean level of quality of life? The status quo in North Korea is atrocious, but what comes after will be pretty awful too.