Slashdot Mirror
North Korean Dictator Kim Jong Il Dead at 70
As reported by numerous sources, Kim Jong Il has died at the age of 70 (69 by some tallies), after 17 years as the brutal head of North Korea. While the cause of death is uncertain, Bloomberg News says "Kim probably had a stroke in August 2008 and may have also contracted pancreatic cancer, according to South Korean news reports."
World has now one asshole less.
Causing trouble abroad is a classic way to cement power at home: "Busy giddy minds with foreign quarrels".
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jdug6yHJB40
There are not enough dictators left in Asia to keep the yellow man down. It's terrifying. Why hasn't the CIA made more they have the technology!
I'd go on a Vegan diet but the delivery time from Vega is too long. --brownkitty
Taking a brutal dictator seriously is exactly the wrong approach. I'd rather remember him as a supporting character in a lowbrow puppet comedy. I won't bother to post the YouTube link, since there's already two or three up here.
Some 0.1 percent of his subjects will now kill themselves in mourning. Is that enough of an appreciation of how important he was?
He was a bad man. bent on nuclear proliferation and providing arms to our enemies. He starved millions of his own people to death. He dedicated something like 1.5 million man-years to the reception of former US president Jimmy Carter.
That's moot now. His son may be coherent, or the military cabal that kills him may be. The news item is that the situation just became fluid. I hope the State department isn't on Christmas break for this one.
Help stamp out iliturcy.
They would have a field day with this.
Which might make him more manageable to the US being that young. I am sure if he doesn't comply he will be gone soon.
He'll be gone for what replacement? If the US goal is to "manage" the region and/or head of state, well... the US doesn't have the best track record for placing people in power in foreign governments.
Actually, this is probably good. It takes a lot of political skill to maintain a dictatorship in the face of all of the normal crises in addition to quelling uprisings. I'd make the argument that a dictator is the highest form of politician since you don't even have the legitimacy of a crown to validate your power. An unprepared heir to a dictator won't likely be able to maintain the current state. Odds are, the military has seen the damage done by KJI and will tack back to a more accessible government; assuming they take over.
I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
That's only because you're from the Western world and think so. You have to remember that Asians have a totally different culture. I just wish US people would understand that, and also understand that maybe everyone in the world don't want them to get involved in everything and try to force rest of the world act like them.
What the US might think is the least of his problems. I think top of mind for him is how to embrace his own military establishment, and reassure them they will not lose influence. I should think he's well trained on the levers of power, so maybe this goes easy.
If the military doesn't accept him, things get pretty random. Random is not good.
Help stamp out iliturcy.
What? No, if you know of a case where free speech has caused problems, bring it up. Otherwise stop trolling. It is extremely insulting to Eastern culture to say that somehow they can't handle free speech. Furthermore it denies the obvious reality that many Asian countries actually do have free speech. Cultural relativism is a useful concept, but don't let it blind you to reality.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
I would start by allowing free speech, criticism of the government
And you'd be instantly deposed by the second tier of the leadership; the people who made it good during the old regime, and who would be jailed or worse if the regime failed or if it became more democratic.
The first thing you need to do is consolidate your hold on power. Remove the old guard, replace people in key positions with your men. Take special care to ensure control over the armed forces - army, police, people's "militias". Make nice or be sure you control non-governmental leaders of opinion, (like religious figures), if such exist. Keep your people honest enough that they won't have too much of a vested interest in keeping the old society style. Only after that should you start opening your society, maybe during your second or third year or thereabouts.
For a relatively good example see how Gorbachev handled his reforms in the former USSR - he started by calling for changes, but kept specifics rather vague, in the meantime making sure the old apparatchiks were removed from power (for example he replaced the powerful conservative Gromyko with the younger reformist Shervadnadze). About one year later he started with the economic reforms (a.k.a. perestroika), at the same time continuing the consolidation of his position. Only after he was sure of his control, in 1988 (three years after being elected secretary of the communist party), did Gorbatchev introduce the "glasnost" liberalization reforms (greater freedom of speech, greater freedom of the press, less control of criticism of the government, release of a big number of political detainees).
Perestroika didn't work, because Gorbachev, whatever his other qualities, was still a communist at heart, and never pushed the reforms far enough. Glasnost was however quite successful, and, IMHO, was a direct contributor to the fall of communism in Eastern Europe, and to the subsequent disollution of the USSR.
woosh!
China is a perfect example. They're slowly going towards free speech, but they can't make that change overnight. It would cause turmoil in the country. You have to remember that most Chinese actually positively agree about limiting free speech. Since China is a democratic country, shouldn't they be able to decide it themselves, without US trying to manipulate?
Besides, free speech in Western world is relative too. Just try yelling fire in a crowded theater. Or dance around a monument in US.
It would cause turmoil in the country.
No it wouldn't. You made that up without providing evidence.
Since China is a democratic country
China is not a democratic country. You can't have true democracy without free speech. Really, this is an important point. If you don't get it, you will never see reality clearly.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
Oh come on, Castro may be a communist and a dictator, but on his best days he couldn't hope to match the shithouse-rat-crazy antics of the Dear Leader.
Surprisingly, it turns out that we nerds occupy forms in the real world, and thus significant news about this world are news for nerds.
Calling China a democratic country is a stretch. The elections are not independent, the communist party maintains full control over it. Besides speech is highly restricted. How do you expect democracy to function without free speech?
Kinda hard to experience any culture there when you're not allowed to speak to anyone. Everything must be filtered through your tour guide.
Sorry, phantomfive - but I think that Sharklaser is speaking with a cultural background that you lack.
Personally, I've never been to China. I've only met a few Chinese people. I don't like China because it is communist, and because they are working hard to steal American jobs, American tech, and they are working hard to dominate American interests.
Despite my likes and dislikes, I've read enough to understand that Chinese culture has almost no resemblance to my own culture. The fact that I have traveled, seen other cultures, and due to the fact that my own relatives represented different cultures gives me some framework to understand what Sharklaser seems to be saying.
The fact is, you don't just turn a culture upside down overnight, unless you enjoy chaos. People who have lived a certain way for generations simply aren't going to accept radical change in ten years, or even twenty.
How many years have the women's libbers been working on their agenda? And, women still bitch about that "glass ceiling". Change doesn't happen overnight, or even within a lifetime. It takes centuries to make really big changes in a culture, UNLESS you're wiling to accept a lot of turmoil.
"Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
Taking a brutal dictator seriously is exactly the wrong approach. I'd rather remember him as a supporting character in a lowbrow puppet comedy.
That's nice, as long as neither you nor your family or friends can be touched by the ridiculous little man's army or secret police. If you lived in NK though, you'd take him much more seriously.
Please understand - I'm not trying to criticize you; I just personally feel uneasy dismissing Kim with a laugh or a shrug from the safety of the USA, even though sometimes he seemed to make a special effort to build himself into a caricature. But then I remember some footage I saw on the BBC a few years ago, supposedly smuggled from NK, showing the summary executions of a few people from a small village and I don't really feel like laughing anymore.
The nukes were on Russian ships, the emplacement was paid for by Russia, and all the money came from Russia as well. I doubt Castro had much to say in how the crisis was resolved. Castro approved the plan to install them, but that's about as far as his involvement went. Everything else was decided directly between Moscow and Washington. You can check out the wikipedia page with the timelines for this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuban_missile_crisis
I don't think he was crazy. I don't think he was a communist either. I just think he was someone who, like a lot of folks, started out the right way but somewhere ended up missing a turn and then took the road down to Hell - paved, as always, with numerous good intentions.
Therefore, by the (faulty) logic you're using, you're just a cow with a keyboard - osu-neko (2604)
Your attitude is shared by a lot of Chinese. However, if I ask them if they'd like everything they do on Weibo to be approved by a government official first, they say no. If I ask them if they want to know about the things that Weibo reports, they say yes. If I ask them: do you want corrupt government officials to be removed from power, they say yes. If I ask them: would you like to know that your cooking oil is poisonous and that your babies' milk contains melanin, killing him, they say yes.
Basically they want free speech for those issues where it suits them. But it doesn't work that way, because the corrupt factory owners never appreciate free speech. So unless you get something we call "free speech", you are giving a blank cheque to those in power who want their corruption to remain secret.
Remember: if an idea cannot stand criticism, it's probably because it's not as good as you thought it was.
Now I have heard it said that people in the city think the peasants are easily incited by some people providing silly ideas (a la Falun Gong). But in most Western countries this type of thing is still illegal: see your own examples. No nation in the world has absolute free speech. But the Chinese should have the freedom to criticize what is going on. Because one thing is certain: the corrupt owners of factories and companies will not stop poisoning people, or putting up buildings that colllapse, or steal the land of the peasants, if noone can speak about it.
Therefore, by the (faulty) logic you're using, you're just a cow with a keyboard - osu-neko (2604)
"don't like China because it is communist,"
Well there's a well thought out argument. FWIW china hasn't been communist for over a decade now - its actually the closest thing to a capitalist dictatorship the world has right now.
"and because they are working hard to steal American jobs, American tech, and they are working hard to dominate American interests."
Oh right, so the chinese forced american companies to outsource all their menufacture to china did they? It had nothing to do with greedy CEOs wanting to save a quick buck and screw whatever US jobs it cost or what knock-on effect it may have on the economy just so they could "raise shareholder value" - and coincidentaly collect a fat bonus for doing it did it? And same CEOs having outsourced blue collar work are not happily outsourcing white collar work to india. I suppose thats the indians fault is it?
You need to look closer to home for the reason china is in the ascendent. I would say the USA has economically shot itself in the foot but its actually closer to having blown its entire leg off.
What? No, if you know of a case where free speech has caused problems, bring it up.
Not that I agree with GP's point, but in the interest of completeness:
Westboro Baptist Church.
I just don't get why this is Apple's fault. There are plenty of companies that outsource to Foxconn
When you see some obnoxious eco-warrior driving a Prius, you are allowed to mock them and point out that they could have bought a lighter, more fuel efficient car and paid a third less. If you see some smug urban prat driving an SUV soft-roader you can likewise point and laugh. Apple users are "Apple Users", not just people who use Apple. They aren't buying the product, they are buying the image and mythology. Mocking that mythology, and dirtying that image, is not just fair game, it's almost mandatory. Notice how quickly and automatically you bit at the bait? That's why you're fair game.
Science is all about firing a drunk pig out of a cannon just to see what happens.
I'm really regretting posting earlier instead of moderating this discussion. A ridiculous bit of hyperbole with a preemptive ad hominem? No wonder you posted AC. Unfortunately, several idiots actually moderated you up, making me reconsider living on this planet anymore.
Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.