Dear Leader? Dead Leader. Kim Jong-il dead at 69

103 posts / 0 new
Last post

clambake wrote:

I'm trying to figure out how Erik was mocking 'radical politics' when Unionist made the unusual assertion that calling Kim Jong-Il a dictator = pro-imperalism.



Catchfire Catchfire's picture

Hi howard. I'm suspending you for 24 hours for your last baseless attack on me. I hope it was worth it.

@clambake I disagree with your characterization of Unionist's post (ETA: cross-posted with Unionist). Unionist did not say that "Kim Jong Il a dictator=pro-imperialism." I won't speak for Unionist, but I can say where I've seen evidence of insufficient anti-imperialist perspective in this thread:

When we repeat, without comment or criticism, the stenographs of NATO, the White House, the CAF and other agents of Western hegemony, we are aiding and abetting their imperialist project. Our job should be, instead, to ask why our ruling powers--whose crimes and acts of agression are well known to the left--are so eager to paint so cartoonish and abject a picture of North Korea, Kim Jong Il and his son. This has nothing to bear on what crimes Kim Jong has actually committed--indeed, we know very little about NK that hasn't been scripted for us by the voiceboxes of power.

Furthermore, the Orientalist trope of the inscrutable Asian has been given a twenty-first century update with our current fascination with Kim Jong Il: his "funny" clothes, his (we're told) psychopathic obsession with power (best illustrated through The Onion and tumblr, apparently). This Othering of NK has resonances with other racist sediments that are no longer palatable to mainstream tastes--but NK and its people are apparently fair game. As I said above, it leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

And so does this thread. Which I am now able to close for length, thankfully. I don't see a need for new one. So let's leave it at this, shall we?


Topic locked