Category: Resources

If South Korea is a colony of the U.S., as you…

If South Korea is a colony of the U.S., as you claim, how come it's not only richer but more developed than the DPRK?

Since 1964, under the fascist dictatorship of Park Chung Hee, south Korea’s economic policy shifted from import-substitution industrialisation (ISI) to export-oriented industrialisation (EOI). The former was attempted by every third world country – the development of an internal market as access to external markets was denied by imperialism and capitalists’ lack of interest in purchasing inferior quality goods from governments considered “hostile.”

In south Korea ISI was an absolute failure, leading to the adoption of EOI as amerikan markets saw an opportunity in profiteering from south Korean labour without much consideration to the political aspect – at the end of the day what mattered was the almighty dollar. However south Korea’s exports were not competitive enough.

The solution to this problem was a combination of establishing an economy based on labour-intensive industries with specific capital-intensive industries receiving substantial subsidies, direct foreign capital investment from both the u.$. and Japan, and exclusive military contracts during war periods (such as the Vietnam War).

In other words, south Korea’s economic development was achieved through selling out Korea, the third world, and benefiting from amerikan patronage. This however became unsustainable for the u.$. as it reached a point where it could no longer afford such generous subsidies and favourable exchange rates.

What is also important to emphasise is that south Korea was among the first countries to shift how imperialism functioned during Lenin’s timecentred around the export of capital and the import of raw materials – to the imperialism of our current times which is centred around the export of production and the import of surplus value.

While advanced production by low waged workers for export to amerikan markets was once an exception, today it is the norm in various countries such as China, Vietnam, India, and so on. Due to this south Korea emerged not as a major imperialist power but as the leader of the semi-periphery with imperialist style corporations such as Samsung, LG, and Hanjin which are nevertheless subordinate to global imperialism.

During the 1980′s workers in south Korea began rebelling against the exploitative nature of the country’s economic policy as well as in reaction to the revelation that most if not all south Korean unions were created and controlled by the u.$. government to prevent the infiltration of any anti-capitalist sentiments. Before 1987 the average hourly wage across industries was at $1.75, meanwhile in the u.$. manufacturing workers earned $13.09 an hour.

With over one million workers going on strike, affecting most major industries, imperialists were forced to concede and raise the wages of south Korean workers to first world levels. It was only at this point that the living conditions of south Korean workers surpassed those of the DPRK, around the 1980′s and 1990′s as the tech market boomed.

All this talk about south Korea being an Asian tiger with high living standards and material abundance is nothing but bourgeois propaganda set on deceiving the world from the harsh realities south Koreans endure to survive. It is for no reason that younger generations refer to country as “Hell Korea” because of youth unemployment, severe economic inequality, excessive working hours, inequality between male and female workers, exploitation of women’s labour, etcetera. Most of south Korea’s elderly population live in abject poverty, and it is not uncommon for people with disabilities to end up in slave style labour camps in rural areas.

Regular

revolutionary-aim:

We recently completely redid our recommended reading section on Anti-Imperialism.org! We have hasty expanded the categories and included many more links to the works included in it. Expect a few more titles to trickle in over the next few weeks as we round up a few that we’ve missed, but definitely check out what’s there.

On The Juche Idea Study Guide

juchechat:

Introduction:

Main Reading:

China: A Modern Social-Imperialist Power, CPI(…

China: A Modern Social-Imperialist Power, CPI(Maoist): undefined

An Exceptional Case? Problematizing Soviet Ant…

An Exceptional Case? Problematizing Soviet Anti-Racism – AAIHS:

universal-equivalents:

This is the best short examination of anti-racism and the Soviet Union I’ve read, with a comment below the article that’s also worth reading. I’ll just quote the first and last paragraphs.

In 1932, African American poet Langston Hughes crossed the Soviet border as part of a group of Black actors invited to the Soviet Union to make an antiracist propaganda film. In his memoir, Hughes described this crossing in almost biblical terms: “In Helsinki, we stayed overnight and the next day we took a train headed for the land … where race prejudice was reported taboo, the land of the Soviets… . When the train stopped [at the border] for passports to be checked, a few of the young black men and women left the train to touch their hands to Soviet soil, lift the new earth in their palms and kiss it.”  That Black visitors to the Soviet Union during the two decades before World War II encountered a society they saw as largely free of racism seems to be borne out by multiple contemporaneous accounts and later memoir literature.

///

As the Soviet Union learned the hard way, simplistic Marxist-Leninist prescriptions rarely worked when addressing the question of race in the United States and across the Third World. The Soviets, it seems, had difficulty connecting to the postcolonial sensibilities of their third world friends and intended beneficiaries. They routinely underestimated and underappreciated the centrality of race in postcolonial discourses, including the very liberation discourse that they claimed to articulate and champion. The presence of third-world people, especially thousands of African students, in the midst of Soviet society, and the idiosyncratic and often unpredictable foreign policy moves by Moscow’s supposed allies and sympathizers in the Third World (not to mention their opponents) defied the Soviet Union’s expectations of forging a “natural” internationalist alliance with non-white populations oppressed and underprivileged by Moscow’s Cold War Western rivals. It is partly in relation to some of these frustrations that one can better understand the intensity of the xenophobic and racist backlash that swept across the former Soviet spaces in the aftermath of the Soviet Union’s collapse.

Docs Reveal Pentagon Plan to Destroy USSR, Chi…

Docs Reveal Pentagon Plan to Destroy USSR, China as “Viable Societies” with Nuclear Weapons:

Recently declassified
documents shed light on a U.S. nuclear war plan developed in 1964 by the
Pentagon’s Joint Staff to bomb Russia – then the Soviet Union – and
China with nuclear weapons so extensively that it would destroy them “as
viable societies.” The war plan itself, known as Single Integrated
Operational Plan 64 (SIOP-64), has not been declassified, as no SIOP has
ever been released to the public by the United States government.

However, newly declassified documents that record the Pentagon Joint Staff’s review of SIOP-64 were recently made available
through George Washington University’s National Security Archive
project. The documents reveal numerous details about the
still-classified plan that shine light on the Pentagon’s willingness to
wage nothing short of total war against its adversaries at the time.

In particular, the documents show
that the plan sought to accomplish the destruction of Russian and
Chinese society by targeting and eliminating their industrial potential
while also wiping out the majority of their urban populations. Still
more troubling, urban civilians were proposed to be the main target
and measure of the U.S. nuclear war plan as the Joint Staff sought to
use “population loss as the primary yardstick for effectiveness in
destroying the enemy society, with only collateral attention to
industrial damage.”


This gambit to use population loss as a
“primary yardstick” was notably developed prior to the 1964 meeting
detailed in the newly released document. The meeting considered studies
that had been jointly conducted by the Joint Staff and the Joint
Strategic Target Planning Staff in order to determine how many Soviet
and Chinese cities and industrial areas needed to be wiped out in order
to destroy both countries as “viable societies.”

Juche Korea Leadership: Books

juchechat:

Kim Ilsung:

Kim Jongil:

Kim Jong-suk:

Post-modernism: A Romantic Petty-Bourgeois Exe…

Post-modernism: A Romantic Petty-Bourgeois Exercise Dumping Rationality and Practice: undefined

Practical Notes Concerning Service Workers: Pr…

Practical Notes Concerning Service Workers: Productive and Unproductive Labor: undefined

Marxist Economics and Amerikan Mass Incarcerat…

Marxist Economics and Amerikan Mass Incarceration: Revisiting ULK 8: undefined