North Korea's official spokesperson, now defected to Britain, speaks about living conditions in his former nation.

yllus

Elite Member & Lifer
Aug 20, 2000
20,577
432
126
A North Korean propagandist sees the light

For 11 years, [Jean-Baptiste Kim] was an official spokesperson for Kim Jong-Il, spreading propaganda and telling the international media it was a crime North Korea's dictator had not won the Nobel Peace Prize. In the 1990s, as the country endured a famine that killed an estimated one million of its citizens, North Korea was a five-star resort for Kim. He ate lavish meals, was attended by personal servants, slept in the same fancy hotels in which Kim Jong-Il slept.

That's all over. Kim now lives in Surrey, a sleepy suburb of London. Here he runs Liberty Telecoms. There are seven locks on the door. Kim rather expects to be shot by North Korean agents; in the meantime, he's got a mobile phone to sell you.

Kim defected last year, and his story is strange and instructive. He is one of the few people to have seen first-hand the results of Kim Jong-Il's policies -- such as the recent news that North Korea has closed its borders with South Korea.

"The life of ordinary people is horrible," he said. "Miserable. I can't ever forget what I've seen. People were wearing clothes that hadn't been washed in one year. It was October, and kids were walking around without shoes. There was a small man, about my age -- and he was no taller than my little daughter. He was a soldier, and he was carrying a Kalashnikov over one shoulder. The rifle was taller than him. And the reason? Because there's nothing to eat."

For a decade, though, Kim said, he witnessed none of this. In the Pyongyang circles he frequented, things didn't seem so bad. "They're high society. They eat good, they're tall, their bodies are healthy, they have nice apartments. And when I say nice, I don't mean like London or Paris -- but OK." Kim shrugged. "I was blind."

In October, 2006, Kim visited parts of the country he had never seen: "Ordinary places, with ordinary people. Small towns, small farms."

The malnutrition he witnessed was tough for him to cope with. Kim said he felt disgusted, and betrayed. "I was proud of my fatherland, of our army. When I met North Korean soldiers on the border with South Korea and shook their hands, I felt that they were not human hands. They were stronger than metal. They could kill me with them. Then I went to the small villages and what I saw I'll never forget."

At 18, Kim fled to France, where he was eventually recruited by a North Korean agent who played on his hatred of South Korean-style capitalism. "He became my father," Kim said. "Everything he told me, I believed. Everything he asked me to do, I did." The agent set Kim up in business, and used Kim's language skills and familiarity with attitudes in South Korea and the West to spread propaganda. The newfound wealth and acceptance was "blinding." He gave political interviews. Sure, North Korea was poor, he said. But the West had poverty too. And it was the West that was hurting North Korea most.

This opinion is frequently expressed among North Korean sympathizers. The United States is widely resented in Asia for continuing to maintain tens of thousands of troops in South Korea half a century after the Korean war.

Even Kim still believes that the North Korean people are right to resist Western influence. "Capitalism might be good for the United States, but not for everyone. For North Korea, communism is a good idea. It fits in North Korea. We can't all be the same."

His years inside the country have convinced him that any rapprochement between the West and North Korea will be useless as long as economic sanctions remain, and that exchange-- economic and cultural--is the only hope for the people under Kim Jong-Il's fist. Forcible regime change in Korea is even less realistic than it was in Iraq: North Korea has the world's fourth-largest army on permanent high alert.

"My generation [of North Koreans], they know their country isn't normal," Kim said. "But the decision-makers, they are still the war generation. They're still in the war, even though it's over now. I'm sorry to say, but they should die as quickly as they can."

This is one of the stranger articles I've ever read, but it wonderfully highlights how strange and contradictory we humans are. How could you have been blinded for years as to the living conditions of the common North Korean? Maintaining that communism is a good system for North Korea has to be one of the most laughable things I've ever read in a news article. I'm guessing that after a decade of touting a system that routinely starves thousands of his own people he's convinced himself that he was in the right all along, even if all of the evidence says otherwise.
 

rudder

Lifer
Nov 9, 2000
19,441
86
91
Communism is a good system... well at least if you are one of the people ruling over the peons.
 

ProfJohn

Lifer
Jul 28, 2006
18,161
7
0
"The life of ordinary people is horrible," he said. "Miserable. I can't ever forget what I've seen. People were wearing clothes that hadn't been washed in one year. It was October, and kids were walking around without shoes. There was a small man, about my age -- and he was no taller than my little daughter. He was a soldier, and he was carrying a Kalashnikov over one shoulder. The rifle was taller than him. And the reason? Because there's nothing to eat."

vs.

"For North Korea, communism is a good idea. It fits in North Korea."


Talk about brain washed.
 
Dec 10, 2005
28,137
12,794
136
Originally posted by: rudder
Communism is a good system... well at least if you are one of the people ruling over the peons.

If anything, communism is the final step in abolishing government. In the Marxian theory, there will be a revolution in which the proletariat seize control of the government. Using that control, the government will then take control over the means of production (socialism). Finally, the government will turn that control directly to the people and effectively be disbanded (communism).

I could see communism working on a small scale, like village to town sized populations, but larger scales just cause problems and are ripe for massive abuse.

Pure capitalism doesn't work either (as Adam Smith said). Certain tasks must be taken up by the government and in some cases, government must intervene with the market to protect society from abusive capital holders since the interests of one contrast almost completely from the interests of the other. The good thing about modified captialist systems is that they can work on a much, much larger scale than any communist/pure socialist system.
 

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,091
513
126
Originally posted by: Brainonska511
Originally posted by: rudder
Communism is a good system... well at least if you are one of the people ruling over the peons.

If anything, communism is the final step in abolishing government. In the Marxian theory, there will be a revolution in which the proletariat seize control of the government. Using that control, the government will then take control over the means of production (socialism). Finally, the government will turn that control directly to the people and effectively be disbanded (communism).

I could see communism working on a small scale, like village to town sized populations, but larger scales just cause problems and are ripe for massive abuse.

Pure capitalism doesn't work either (as Adam Smith said). Certain tasks must be taken up by the government and in some cases, government must intervene with the market to protect society from abusive capital holders since the interests of one contrast almost completely from the interests of the other. The good thing about modified captialist systems is that they can work on a much, much larger scale than any communist/pure socialist system.

I dont see how anything in its pure form works. Communism and free market capitalism would be nothing but anarchy. That said capitalism in the wild has been very successful where communism in the wild is nothing but tyranny and misery.
 

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
35,508
9,727
136
Originally posted by: Brainonska511
I could see communism working on a small scale, like village to town sized populations, but larger scales just cause problems and are ripe for massive abuse.

I say the same thing about democracy. There is a reason we were once a Union instead of a single State ourselves.
 

StageLeft

No Lifer
Sep 29, 2000
70,150
5
0
Many NKs ARE brainwashed. They really, truly do think they have it good and/or love Kim. He is evil on a level far above Saddam or any contemporary dictator. He has utterly destroyed NK.
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,589
5
0
Originally posted by: Skoorb
Many NKs ARE brainwashed. They really, truly do think they have it good and/or love Kim. He is evil on a level far above Saddam or any contemporary dictator. He has utterly destroyed NK.

Only when you have a reference point to compare to.

The NK government has shutdown all leaking of what is outside their borders.
People who travel outside NK are either in danger if they open their mouth or they know their families are.

The "average" NK does not have comprehension of the rest of the world and operates on what they are spoon fed.

 

jackace

Golden Member
Oct 6, 2004
1,307
0
0
Originally posted by: Genx87
Originally posted by: Brainonska511
Originally posted by: rudder
Communism is a good system... well at least if you are one of the people ruling over the peons.

If anything, communism is the final step in abolishing government. In the Marxian theory, there will be a revolution in which the proletariat seize control of the government. Using that control, the government will then take control over the means of production (socialism). Finally, the government will turn that control directly to the people and effectively be disbanded (communism).

I could see communism working on a small scale, like village to town sized populations, but larger scales just cause problems and are ripe for massive abuse.

Pure capitalism doesn't work either (as Adam Smith said). Certain tasks must be taken up by the government and in some cases, government must intervene with the market to protect society from abusive capital holders since the interests of one contrast almost completely from the interests of the other. The good thing about modified captialist systems is that they can work on a much, much larger scale than any communist/pure socialist system.

I dont see how anything in its pure form works. Communism and free market capitalism would be nothing but anarchy. That said capitalism in the wild has been very successful where communism in the wild is nothing but tyranny and misery.

The way I see it communism under a fair and just government would be good for everyone. The problem with communism is the leaders, once corrupt, they have all the power and control.

Capitalism on the other hand is like survival of the fittest. Without some form of catch mechanisms in place or some type of social programs in place you end up with the rich running/owning the system because they own most the assets and control most of the money.

Both systems have their positives and negatives. The big downfall of communism is a couple corrupt leader ruins the entire system. At least with capitalism it takes time for the rich and elite to take power.
 
Sep 12, 2004
16,852
59
86
Originally posted by: Brainonska511
Originally posted by: rudder
Communism is a good system... well at least if you are one of the people ruling over the peons.

If anything, communism is the final step in abolishing government. In the Marxian theory, there will be a revolution in which the proletariat seize control of the government. Using that control, the government will then take control over the means of production (socialism). Finally, the government will turn that control directly to the people and effectively be disbanded (communism).

I could see communism working on a small scale, like village to town sized populations, but larger scales just cause problems and are ripe for massive abuse.

Pure capitalism doesn't work either (as Adam Smith said). Certain tasks must be taken up by the government and in some cases, government must intervene with the market to protect society from abusive capital holders since the interests of one contrast almost completely from the interests of the other. The good thing about modified captialist systems is that they can work on a much, much larger scale than any communist/pure socialist system.
Pure communism doesn't even work on small scales which is why all the communes from the 60s eventually fell apart. The reason is doesn't work is that communism doesn't take human behavior and psychology into account. In virtually any group of people someone always wants to be the alpha dog. Someone always wants and takes more than the next guy. On the opposite end of the spectrum there are those refuse to contribute their fair share. That problem manifests itself among groups of 60 just as it does groups of 60 million.

Pure comunism requires absolute equality of effort from everyone involved, where nobody takes too much or provides too little. If not, resentment festers and the entire system falls apart. Unfortunately, humans are all too often all about taking too much for themselves while contributing as little as possible.

The above doesn't even take the cult of personality, and personality conflicts, into consideration, which is another downfall of pure comunism.

If humans were all perfect people then pure communism would work. Then again, if humans were perfect pure capitalism would work as well and would probably be a better system for the overall welfare of mankind.
 

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,091
513
126
Originally posted by: jackace
Originally posted by: Genx87
Originally posted by: Brainonska511
Originally posted by: rudder
Communism is a good system... well at least if you are one of the people ruling over the peons.

If anything, communism is the final step in abolishing government. In the Marxian theory, there will be a revolution in which the proletariat seize control of the government. Using that control, the government will then take control over the means of production (socialism). Finally, the government will turn that control directly to the people and effectively be disbanded (communism).

I could see communism working on a small scale, like village to town sized populations, but larger scales just cause problems and are ripe for massive abuse.

Pure capitalism doesn't work either (as Adam Smith said). Certain tasks must be taken up by the government and in some cases, government must intervene with the market to protect society from abusive capital holders since the interests of one contrast almost completely from the interests of the other. The good thing about modified captialist systems is that they can work on a much, much larger scale than any communist/pure socialist system.

I dont see how anything in its pure form works. Communism and free market capitalism would be nothing but anarchy. That said capitalism in the wild has been very successful where communism in the wild is nothing but tyranny and misery.

The way I see it communism under a fair and just government would be good for everyone. The problem with communism is the leaders, once corrupt, they have all the power and control.

Capitalism on the other hand is like survival of the fittest. Without some form of catch mechanisms in place or some type of social programs in place you end up with the rich running/owning the system because they own most the assets and control most of the money.

Both systems have their positives and negatives. The big downfall of communism is a couple corrupt leader ruins the entire system. At least with capitalism it takes time for the rich and elite to take power.

Communism in its purest form is govtless. Capitalism in a free market in its purest form is structure less. Both are anarchy.

The biggest downfall of Communism is it is impossible to implement when you expand it past a single person. Who determines what is good for the people if there is no governing body? It becomes mob rule or in other words anarchy.

What we got in the communist movements of the 20th is the middle step called socialism. Where the state confiscates the wealth created by capitalism. Nobody even Marx had a plan for transitioning from socialism to communism. It ended up in tyranny, oppression, and millions dead.

I really dont see a single positive of communism even in its purest form. Unless I can live on an island inside a lake within an island where my neighbors cant determine what I need.

Regulated Capitalism on the other hand rewards good traits of man. Hard work, intelligence, and compassion with individual liberty, freedom, and the ability to create his own wealth. And while we talk about the divide between rich and poor. I really question in the overall scheme of things whether this is a bad or good thing. Because while a rich man may create 30 billion in wealth. His slice of the pie grows smaller as his wealth in turn creates 100 billion in wealth by funding others in their creation of wealth.

Bill gates was worth about 60 billion in 2000. He is still worth about that much in 2008. Over that time period the economy has grown from ~10 billion to 14 billion. What power does he hold? Not as much as he did in 2000 economically.

The power that can be corrupted is the govt. This can be solved by dispersing power among the states instead of concentrating it in washington dc. In other words maintain a smaller less overbearing govt.
 

OutHouse

Lifer
Jun 5, 2000
36,410
616
126
i have a lawyer friend who i stopped being friends with because she totally believes in socialism has admitted to me of being a socialist. our friendship breaking convo started when over lunch she started quoting Marx, that the government should redistribute wealth, take from the rich, that most of america shares her socialist views and so on... it pissed me off to end, told her she was full of shit and left.
 

tfcmasta97

Platinum Member
Feb 7, 2004
2,003
0
0
This highlights the exact problems of communism. The plight of the many is hidden, with atrocities that the world would not accept or let stand if only they knew about them.

They control information. You are not allowed any ACCESS to information outside of the propaganda machine. They hold resources to be distributed to everyone in control. Dissent from their opinions means jailing and death, and you dont escape from those which control everything. In Vietnam, before my family fled, they had to keep a picture of the tyrant in control in their living room by law, even though they are the most hated villain, you dont want to get arrested or executed so you abide.

All they have to do is kill off the generation that understands freedom and are willing to resist, then the rest will be too poor and afraid to fight back.

 
Sep 12, 2004
16,852
59
86
Originally posted by: tfcmasta97
This highlights the exact problems of communism. The plight of the many is hidden, with atrocities that the world would not accept or let stand if only they knew about them.

They control information. You are not allowed any ACCESS to information outside of the propaganda machine. They hold resources to be distributed to everyone in control. Dissent from their opinions means jailing and death, and you dont escape from those which control everything. In Vietnam, before my family fled, they had to keep a picture of the tyrant in control in their living room by law, even though they are the most hated villain, you dont want to get arrested or executed so you abide.

All they have to do is kill off the generation that understands freedom and are willing to resist, then the rest will be too poor and afraid to fight back.
I don't know if that highlights the problems of communism.

In NK's case what it highlights is what happens under a brutal totalitarian system where the dictator wants to brainwash his people into believing he's some kind of god.
 

StageLeft

No Lifer
Sep 29, 2000
70,150
5
0
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Originally posted by: tfcmasta97
This highlights the exact problems of communism. The plight of the many is hidden, with atrocities that the world would not accept or let stand if only they knew about them.

They control information. You are not allowed any ACCESS to information outside of the propaganda machine. They hold resources to be distributed to everyone in control. Dissent from their opinions means jailing and death, and you dont escape from those which control everything. In Vietnam, before my family fled, they had to keep a picture of the tyrant in control in their living room by law, even though they are the most hated villain, you dont want to get arrested or executed so you abide.

All they have to do is kill off the generation that understands freedom and are willing to resist, then the rest will be too poor and afraid to fight back.
I don't know if that highlights the problems of communism.

In NK's case what it highlights is what happens under a brutal totalitarian system where the dictator wants to brainwash his people into believing he's some kind of god.
Perhaps not but he got the rest of it right. People do have pics of Kim in their homes, though at least some truly do love him. He is vile and has a special place in the underworld. By comparison he truly does make saddam look like a doting grandfather figure. The country has spent up to 30% of its GDP, the last time I checked, on military while most people are short of food. During the major famine in the 90's (?) there are even some reports of people resorting to canniabalism.

 
Sep 12, 2004
16,852
59
86
Originally posted by: Skoorb
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Originally posted by: tfcmasta97
This highlights the exact problems of communism. The plight of the many is hidden, with atrocities that the world would not accept or let stand if only they knew about them.

They control information. You are not allowed any ACCESS to information outside of the propaganda machine. They hold resources to be distributed to everyone in control. Dissent from their opinions means jailing and death, and you dont escape from those which control everything. In Vietnam, before my family fled, they had to keep a picture of the tyrant in control in their living room by law, even though they are the most hated villain, you dont want to get arrested or executed so you abide.

All they have to do is kill off the generation that understands freedom and are willing to resist, then the rest will be too poor and afraid to fight back.
I don't know if that highlights the problems of communism.

In NK's case what it highlights is what happens under a brutal totalitarian system where the dictator wants to brainwash his people into believing he's some kind of god.
Perhaps not but he got the rest of it right. People do have pics of Kim in their homes, though at least some truly do love him. He is vile and has a special place in the underworld. By comparison he truly does make saddam look like a doting grandfather figure. The country has spent up to 30% of its GDP, the last time I checked, on military while most people are short of food. During the major famine in the 90's (?) there are even some reports of people resorting to canniabalism.
The guy is a complete megalomaniacal scumbag. I don't think his politics or policies are attributes of communism though, other than the bastardized form of the word "communism" that we tend to apply to States that are really socialist in nature. It seems that today's definition of communism has come to mean a socialist dictatorship. No country has ever truly practiced communism.
 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
70,698
6,257
126
It's easy to continue believing in an Ideology when it hasn't been given the chance to Succeed/Fail. The various attempts at "Communism" have failed for various reasons, but may not have failed near as dramatically under different circumstances. It is very likely that even if North Korea was Capitalist and still a Closed rogue Dictatorship, it would still be a hell hole. It simply does not have the Resources necessary to be a Closed Society. Few Nations could be closed off from the rest of the World and survive.

Not a defense of Communism, I just think that North Korea isn't a clear example of what's wrong with Communism.
 

StageLeft

No Lifer
Sep 29, 2000
70,150
5
0
Originally posted by: sandorski
It's easy to continue believing in an Ideology when it hasn't been given the chance to Succeed/Fail. The various attempts at "Communism" have failed for various reasons, but may not have failed near as dramatically under different circumstances. It is very likely that even if North Korea was Capitalist and still a Closed rogue Dictatorship, it would still be a hell hole. It simply does not have the Resources necessary to be a Closed Society. Few Nations could be closed off from the rest of the World and survive.

Not a defense of Communism, I just think that North Korea isn't a clear example of what's wrong with Communism.
At least so far communism has inevitably bastardized itself due to its complete incompatibility with humanity; there has never been a pure communism because there never could be.

 

tfcmasta97

Platinum Member
Feb 7, 2004
2,003
0
0
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Originally posted by: Skoorb
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Originally posted by: tfcmasta97
This highlights the exact problems of communism. The plight of the many is hidden, with atrocities that the world would not accept or let stand if only they knew about them.

They control information. You are not allowed any ACCESS to information outside of the propaganda machine. They hold resources to be distributed to everyone in control. Dissent from their opinions means jailing and death, and you dont escape from those which control everything. In Vietnam, before my family fled, they had to keep a picture of the tyrant in control in their living room by law, even though they are the most hated villain, you dont want to get arrested or executed so you abide.

All they have to do is kill off the generation that understands freedom and are willing to resist, then the rest will be too poor and afraid to fight back.
I don't know if that highlights the problems of communism.

In NK's case what it highlights is what happens under a brutal totalitarian system where the dictator wants to brainwash his people into believing he's some kind of god.
Perhaps not but he got the rest of it right. People do have pics of Kim in their homes, though at least some truly do love him. He is vile and has a special place in the underworld. By comparison he truly does make saddam look like a doting grandfather figure. The country has spent up to 30% of its GDP, the last time I checked, on military while most people are short of food. During the major famine in the 90's (?) there are even some reports of people resorting to canniabalism.
The guy is a complete megalomaniacal scumbag. I don't think his politics or policies are attributes of communism though, other than the bastardized form of the word "communism" that we tend to apply to States that are really socialist in nature. It seems that today's definition of communism has come to mean a socialist dictatorship. No country has ever truly practiced communism.

That's EXACTLY the way that communism works. They ARE megalomaniacal scumbags. This is COMMUNISM IN PRACTICE, there never will be a true communist ideal in practice that could work beyond a group of maybe 10 people, something that is more of a family system supporting each other if anything.

The only ones who love him are the ones who get a way into the regime's ranks, which is a small minority compared to the majority that suffers unthinkable poverty. The sad thing is when the generation that can fight back dies off, those born into the system accept their fate where the only way out is to be part of the machine, where they'd gladly accept their relative wealth with a standard of living hundreds of times better than the poor.
 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
70,698
6,257
126
Originally posted by: Skoorb
Originally posted by: sandorski
It's easy to continue believing in an Ideology when it hasn't been given the chance to Succeed/Fail. The various attempts at "Communism" have failed for various reasons, but may not have failed near as dramatically under different circumstances. It is very likely that even if North Korea was Capitalist and still a Closed rogue Dictatorship, it would still be a hell hole. It simply does not have the Resources necessary to be a Closed Society. Few Nations could be closed off from the rest of the World and survive.

Not a defense of Communism, I just think that North Korea isn't a clear example of what's wrong with Communism.
At least so far communism has inevitably bastardized itself due to its complete incompatibility with humanity; there has never been a pure communism because there never could be.

I agree, but same holds true for pure capitalism. I think the failures of "communism" we've seen are likely because the people espousing it and succeeding in establishing it have largely used it as a motivational tool to gain support. That's not to say that all were not true believers in it, but it has most often turned into a rather useful tool to gain then maintain power for certain Individuals. I think the strong external Opposition to such attempts have kinda influenced those results though. As the Ideologues were immediatley under threat by Foreign Nations(US especially, but other as well). This put all attempts into a state of War and all the extra control necessary under such circumstances.

I think the Cold War shows one thing both sides were correct about: The other side was attempting to control the whole World.

It was packaged as if Global Control was Evil in and of Itself. Not really true, because each Needed that level of control in order for their particular brand of Economic Ideology to succeed. So the whole thing was a Propoganda stunt, by each side.

 

piasabird

Lifer
Feb 6, 2002
17,168
60
91
I guess they did not mention in the article that the North Korean Regime had labor and prison camps where they gas people to death. There is something wrong in a system the size of about half of Minnesota, where you save money to make nuclear weapons by starving your own people to death by the millions and then blame it on the USA.

Keep in mind that it was the Russians after WWII that partitioned the country of Korea and taught them to be communists. Instead of teaching people to be free, they taught them the need to spread their communism at the point of a gun. When North Korea invaded South Korea they did so with soviet made weapons and tanks.

Korea has been invaded by the chinese, the Japanese, the Mongols and other people. If it was not for the Chinese Communists, all of Korea would be one unified nation today.

The Japanese destroyed their government, chopped down all their trees, Overfished their good fishing grounds, Stole their farmland and other national resources, Raped their women, and then conscripted their men to mine coal and metal and work in their factories during WWII. When we used the Nuclear Bombs on Japan about 100,000 Korean men, who had been treated like slaves died. The Japanese did the same thing in parts of China As well.

What they dont teach people in school is that before WWII, the USA refused to Help the Koreans. In fact the actions of USA and the nations at the Hague made it possible for Japan to gain the resources to fight effectively during WWII. If the USA would have stood against Japanese Aggression against Korea and China, then they would have not had to fight the Japanese during WWII.

However, we cant go back in time.
 

cwjerome

Diamond Member
Sep 30, 2004
4,346
26
81
North Korea quickly devolved into squalid tyranny and evil because that's really all communism is capable of outside the academic texts.
 
Sep 12, 2004
16,852
59
86
Originally posted by: tfcmasta97
That's EXACTLY the way that communism works. They ARE megalomaniacal scumbags. This is COMMUNISM IN PRACTICE, there never will be a true communist ideal in practice that could work beyond a group of maybe 10 people, something that is more of a family system supporting each other if anything.

The only ones who love him are the ones who get a way into the regime's ranks, which is a small minority compared to the majority that suffers unthinkable poverty. The sad thing is when the generation that can fight back dies off, those born into the system accept their fate where the only way out is to be part of the machine, where they'd gladly accept their relative wealth with a standard of living hundreds of times better than the poor.
In true communism you wouldn't have a grand, exalted leader in the first place. In fact, true communism is closer to a true democracy than anything else. NK is not really communist even though they like to espouse a bit of Marxist rhetoric to the masses, probably since rhetoric is easier to dish out than food.

NK is a despotic socialist dictatorship. It's a prime example of socialism run amuck, with a dabble of fascism thrown in for good measure. They aren't communists and never really have been. The misunderstanding about that is our own fault though. It probably goes back to the pointy-headed/ivory tower types earlier in this century who, being in love with socialism themselves, applied a different term to bad examples of socialism because then they didn't feel so dirty.