talkpolitics | Have we forgotten why they hate us?

mahnmut posting in

I mean not exactly "us", but the U.S. See, the North Korean people are deprived of many things. Freedom, you'd say. Sure, freedom. Also, food. (They do have plenty of weapons, though). But one thing is more abundant than anything else: propaganda. They start getting fed anti-US hatred from the cradle. They're taught to hate the "imperialist aggressor" in their guts from day one.

This propaganda functions flawlessly, because it feeds on the collective memory from the Korean war. It's a war that keeps defining the life and mindset of North Koreans to this very day. The fact that technically, the war ain't even over yet, is helping a lot in that respect, too. In fact, no peace treaty has ever been signed, there's just an armistice. Six decades of official war! Amazing.

https://i.ebayimg.com/images/a/(KGrHqJ,!joE1K(oNOj0BN,cWVBhdg~~/s-l300.jpg

Let me remind how it all started. On June 25, 1950, the NK army crossed the 38th parallel. With this invasion, they wanted to achieve the second unification of the Korean peninsula. To put it bluntly, North Korea was the one that started this war.

But when Donald Trump is now threatening in straight terms that NK would "face things it never thought possible", this is feeding pretty neatly into Kim's propaganda, and also giving more ammo to the collective memory about the events from six decades ago. And when US secretary of defense James Mattis is accusing the NK regime of "destroying its own people", the propaganda is eager to revive the painful national trauma.

Because the North Koreans have already suffered a mass annihilation once: between 1950 and 1953. The US bombers dropped tons of death over NK for three years back then. Completely disregarding the civil population, as Bruce Cumings testifies in his book The Korean War (he calls America's actions a war crime, plain and simple).

The US dropped more bombs and napalm over NK than in the entire WW2 battle against Japan. 20% of the entire NK population perished in those air strikes, Gen. Curtis LeMay attests (he was the commander of the US air force at the time). In a 1984 interview he noted that all NK cities were leveled to the ground by the US in one way or another. Also, some cities in SK, like Pusan. That one went down by mistake, a miscalculation. Friendly fire, you know.

Another notable person from that epoch, the then US secretary of state Dean Rusk who was responsible for East Asia during the Korean war, said that the US bombed everything and anything that moved beyond the 38th parallel. The US had complete domination in the sky, and they used it to turn NK into rubble. And in an 1954 interview, the allied forces commander Gen. Douglas MacArthur expressed his regrets that he hadn't received approval to carry out his plan of ending the war Japan-style, within just ten days.

That plan included dropping "between 30 and 50 nukes". What's more, MacArthur also wanted to turn the border between North Korea and China into an impassable death zone by covering it in a 5km belt of radioactive cobalt. The purpose was to prevent any sort of support to NK from China. Eventually, the UN and the US state department rejected the plan.

All these unpleasant historical facts may've long been forgotten in the West, because they're not taught in school. But in the minds of the North Koreans, they're pretty much alive to this day. These are massacres, war crimes. Like the one in No Gun Ree. As it transpired in 1999, US soldiers had slaughtered hundreds of civilians there who were fleeing from the war. Killing refugees. Because those were coming from a commie country.

The anti-communist witch-hunts in South Korea during and after the war were even deadlier. Right after the war broke out, thousands of real or perceived communists and NK sympathizers were rounded up and executed south of the border. The US officers knew full well what was happening, but they turned the other way. And because the reports and photos from those atrocities remained under wraps for decades, the truth only transpired in 2008. The so called The Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Korea, assembled by former SK president Roh Moo-Hyun, estimates the number of victims to at least 100,000. North Korea was falsely blamed for the bulk of those atrocities. They did make similar purges on their territory, of course. But not those.

So keep all that in mind when you're thinking of the crazy North Koreans and their hatred of America.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

From:

halialkers

So how did Germany, Japan, Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, and the like get over the bombing of those countries? Or Italy for that matter? Why are North Koreans the only country the USA bombed perpetually stuck in anger over this? What made them unique?

From:

mikeyxw

Maybe because the North Koreans have a God-King that selectively choses brutal acts from a war the enteral leader started along with half-truths, outright lies, and a complete lack of outside information to keep the population subservient through the kinds of famines and other crisis that would bring down most governments.

From:

halialkers

Well yes if we're going for boring reality-based factors there.

From:

mikeyxw

I didn't think North Korea was boring.

Anyhow, I don't get the navel gazing in this case. If Iraq was building a nuke and threatening the US, sure, there'd be a good reason to ask what we've done. North Korea teaches their population that the US started the Korean war, US soldiers drink human blood, and that an imminent US attack has only been held off for the past 65 years because of the Kim family. It really doesn't matter how humanely the US would have conducted the Korean war, they need an enemy and they'll make up whatever they need. If the US had stood by, let North Korea take over the South, subjecting a few tens of millions more people to what is the most odious government in the world, they might have picked Japan as the blood-drinking imperialist enemy, but they could just as easily have stuck with the US.

From:

garote

The US has deeper aid/appeasement pockets. Definitely a deliberate choice.

From:

halialkers

Yeah but try telling reflexively anti-American people a bit of reality like that and they'll whine that the USA should do what they won't do with mere immigrants with a totalitarian dictatorship it gave decades of peace to get it firing missiles at our allies and threatening to nuke us. If that was aimed at Russia or China North Korea would be a parking lot of green glass the next day.

And those same people who'd call the USA doing that genocide would react like how they did to Russia bombing Syrian hospitals compared to the USA doing it: a Russian or Chinese annihilation of North Korea would be noble statesmanship by a civilized society, not a cold-blooded slaughter by an empire tired of an uppity tail trying hard to wag the dog.

From:

halialkers

Certainly the Russians and literally every other imperialist state but the USA can engage in any level of genocidal slaughter they please and get not a shred of criticism from supposedly civilized anti-war types. Putin literally built his reputation on the bones of Chechens and imposed their little homophobic genocidal tyrant there and I bet most people will blame the Muslim peoples of the northern Caucasus rather than the Christian empire that has been killing them since the mid-19th Century.

Making the largest empire the sole source of all evil avoids dealing with the ugly reality that the only thing that's really different is the USA has no real rivals worthy of the name and the end of the USSR destroyed the power of the narrative, so it's a colossus with feet of cotton candy.

From:

mahnmut

Oh, but all those have already sold their souls to Mammon!

From:

0rder

This occurred to me, as well. It's unfortunately not hard to find nations that have, at some point in the past, been subjected to American war crimes, or regime changes, or what have you. And while you can certainly find people who continue to "hate" the U.S. in any of those countries, it's also true that, for the most part, Americans now have more-or-less friendly relations with their governments and the majorities of their populations.

That said, it's essential that Americans remember the history here, because it makes sense of Kim Jong-un's drive for the nuclear warhead-on-ICBM that we otherwise seem inclined to describe as "crazy." As long as we refuse to take seriously his legitimate belief that this is an existential question for the DPRK, we'll continue to think we can convince him to abandon his program through ever-harsher sanctions. He may be manipulating domestic sentiment in order to distract from domestic problems. But it's hard to disagree the threat is salient.

From:

halialkers

Honestly it's much simpler than that. The USA gave them nuclear reactors foolishly believing they wouldn't use them for nuclear weapons, made it clear that the potential to develop weapons would lead to likely invasions. Then they developed them and have been left alone since.

The thing is that after they rescinded that armistice they've basically shown themselves to be willfully marching to their own suicide with the scam instead of milking it, and there's an amazing dissonance in refusing to give them full marks for being self-destructive in a fashion with few equals.

From:

mahnmut

"it's also true that, for the most part, Americans now have more-or-less friendly relations with their governments and the majorities of their populations"

But do you have proof? And, and, and also evidence?

From:

0rder

Well, let's be specific. I would posit that the U.S. has generally good relations with each of Germany and Japan. Relations with Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia may not be "warm," but they have been generally improving.

If you disagree with those characterizations, I can see what I can find.

From:

mahnmut

Please do.

From:

0rder

Here's a relatively recent poll of international attitudes towards the U.S. You'll note that Japan views the U.S. very positively, while Germany is less positive after a recent drop-off (though still more positive than not). The U.S. polls well even in Vietnam. Cambodia and Laos aren't listed.

On an official level, the U.S. maintains military bases in each of Japan and Germany, with the consent of their national governments (if not always with the local residents). Germany has been instrumental in pursuing open economic trade between the EU and the U.S., while Japan and the U.S. have been strong economic partners, with the U.S. being Japan's biggest export destination. Germany and the U.S. are both partners in NATO, while Japan enjoys a strong commitment from the U.S. to protect it from foreign attacks, and is proving increasingly important in the present negotiations with the DPRK.

Really, I'm just reading from the Wikipedia articles here. I could continue paraphrasing, or you could review the articles for "Laos-United States relations" (which, as I've noted, shows some thawing relations, though I wouldn't say it's passed the line into "friendly" quite yet) "Cambodia-United States relations" (where relations seem more cordial and public sentiment broadly more supportive), and "Vietnam-United States relations." I suspect that, on those three, a lot of the U.S.-friendly sentiment may stem from a need to counterbalance the regional hegemon (i.e., China), a dynamic that has recently shifted dramatically, but for now I think the general characterization remains accurate.

Each of those articles comes with the usual Wikipedia cites, which I would encourage you to follow, if you disagree with what they've been linked to support. Perhaps once you've engaged, we could discuss any open points of disagreement.

Edited Date: 8/9/17 11:28 (UTC)

From:

mahnmut

What, in your opinion, is the reason for the recent drop-off in positive attitudes to the US?

Edited Date: 8/9/17 13:53 (UTC)

From:

0rder

In Germany, between 2011 and 2015, you mean? I'm not sure, and I'm not sure the polling data I've cited has much to say about it. U.S. policy towards Germany didn't change substantially during that time.

In that period of time: Putin was re-elected as president, Russia invaded Ukraine, the Syrian civil war developed into a major humanitarian crisis, ISIS established a territorial footprint in Iraq, the AfD party was established, and some of the most significant brinkmanship over the Greek debt crisis occurred.

So, I'd speculate, over that period of time German sentiment soured over ties with America along with distrust, amongst the right, of the "globalist" order Obama's U.S. still pushed for, inspired by resentment over "bailing out" the Greeks and migrant inflows, while amongst the left, sentiment might have soured over business-as-usual American military adventurism in the Middle East and Afghanistan (after an initial period of hope with Obama) and resentment over trade negotiations between the EU and the U.S. (GMOs, IP, etc.). All of that would have been fed by uncertainty about a newly assertive Russia under its president-for-life, Putin, and disappointment that the U.S. wasn't doing more to keep Putin in check.

From:

luzribeiro

Don't tell me you didn't catch the joke here.

Paft, is that you? (long story)

Edited Date: 8/9/17 10:45 (UTC)

From:

0rder

I understand what Mahnmut is trying to do. I am trying to extend to him the sort of respect I don't feel he's extended to me.

From:

mikeyxw

That isn't his "extend respect" icon.

From:

mahnmut

It's not my "disrespect" icon, either. Come on!

From:

mikeyxw

Aw, don't be sad, I never said it was.

From:

mahnmut

Can we hug now?

From:

mahnmut

First, respect is earned, people are not entitled to it.

Then again, I hope I'm still allowed to make the occasional joke without being scolded to death.

From:

garote

(reply from suspended user)

From:

nairiporter

OK, I think you've had enough with the jabs already.

From:

asthfghl

At least they're not chanting "Death to America".

Oh wait.

From:

oportet

I think most people - including myself - tend to think of KJU as a typical leader; Find a boogieman - a focus for the peoples hate - and manipulate away. Talk big, but not actually believe in what they're saying.

But - he could very well be a true believer. Your post, his age - make me think that is more likely than 'crazy on the outside calculating on the inside'.

From:

conuly

He was educated in Europe, wasn't he?

From:

oportet

I have no idea - or had no idea at least - but I just looked it up!

He may have gone to school in Switzerland, but there is no absolute proof - there is a chance that wasn't him, but instead his brother who would be in charge except he got caught trying to go to Disneyland. I never heard this story before - it may be not be true at all - but it doesn't seem to be disputed...

From:

luzribeiro

Cities raised to the ground, hundreds of thousands indiscriminately murdered for the sake of bringing quick peace - and less than a generation later, brotherly hugs? We're such peaceful people! Long live Western civilization!

(deleted comment)

From:

luzribeiro

Nice joke. I'm sure you made it because your Portuguese or Afrikaans is better than my English? ;-)

Edited Date: 8/9/17 18:15 (UTC)

From:

mahnmut

Muito bem!

Aaand, that's about all I know.

From:

garote

Would it be appropriate if I responded with "Oh cry me a river."?

From:

luzribeiro

Totally! But only if you use "ooo snap!" afterwards!

From:

garote

I rummaged around and found these memes, perhaps they'll do:

From:

mahnmut

Bonus points if you say that in Afrikaans.

From:

garote

Dit help nie om nou al die bobbejaan agter die bult te gaan haal nie!!

From:

mahnmut

(reply from suspended user)

From:

fridi

Pst! It's still there.

From:

garote

Right you are.

From:

johnny9fingers

Indeed.

From:

conuly

All these unpleasant historical facts may've long been forgotten in the West, because they're not taught in school.

They're not taught in school, and they're not really part of the popular media anymore either. When I was a kid, you could sometimes get reruns of MASH, but not anymore.

Vietnam's going the same way, which is weird.

From:

airiefairie

When past mistakes are ignored and then forgotten, they tend to get repeated over time.

From:

garote

Pretty sure this is why history didn't end at least 12 thousand years ago... :|

From:

halialkers

Well when the generations that actually went through them are dying off and fading into the ghostlands of mythology and not history, that tends to happen. Especially with wars people lose. France doesn't exactly dwell on Algeria very much, does it?