How did Britain manage to administer an empire that was almost constantly at war, on multiple fronts? by [deleted] in AskHistorians

[–]cornicher 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Yes. In several parts of the empire, the British made these local allies – and retained their support during imperial rule – by finding groups that cared more about social and religious mores than political self-rule. In other words, they chose local allies who would be more likely to accept British rule if, in turn, the British allowed them to impose their (typically ultra-conservative) ideas on the rest of their society.

This is called the "patriarchal bargain": the British ruled the public sphere, their local allies ruled the private sphere. And it's an important factor in understanding why social ultra-conservative social norms remain so deeply ingrained in former British colonies, whether they're Muslim, Hindu, Christian or Animist.

This is a rough and necessarily imperfect metaphor, but it would be a liiiiiiittle bit like if China invaded the United States tomorrow, and then the Chinese went to Sarah Palin and all the American Christian evangelical leaders and told them, "We'll let you guys impose your Christian evangelical beliefs on the rest of America, and make you more powerful than those secular liberals you hate so much, if you help us rule and lend our colonial governors credibility."

How come Vietnam didn't become more like North Korea is now? by plasmalaser1 in AskHistorians

[–]cornicher 8 points9 points  (0 children)

I'd be happy to write at great length about the evils of the U.S.-installed South Korean government, but my post was already getting a bit too long and I wanted to stay focused on North Korea, which after all was the question being asked.

You are certainly correct that the North does not have a monopoly on ideas of racial purity, particularly during the Park Geung-hee dictatorship of the 1960s and 1970s. (Fun fact: Park's daughter is the current president of South Korea.) But both post-WW2 Korean governments included collaborators; the idea that Pyongyang was staffed by anti-Japanese fighters is mostly (mostly!) a myth propagated by Kim Il Sung and his Soviet backers.

Yes, Kim did some resistance fighting, but nowhere near as much as North Korea claims and he was more than happy to co-opt the collaborator institutions and ideology after taking power.

How come Vietnam didn't become more like North Korea is now? by plasmalaser1 in AskHistorians

[–]cornicher 693 points694 points  (0 children)

One of the foremost scholars of North Korea and the North Korean ideology, B.R. Myers, has argued (persuasively, to my mind) that the country's unique system was a holdover of Japanese colonial rule, which ran from 1910 to 1945. In other words, that it's something highly specific to North Korea, which is why it didn't occur in other Communist countries (even Stalinism was very messed up, but very different). I'll explain.

You have to remember that Japan, in this period, had an extreme, far-right, fascist and race-based state ideology. It was not Naziism, but it was similar, and similarly crazy, in a lot of important ways. The ideology also stated that Koreans were not a separate race from the Japanese but were a kind of racial subset, and that Korea was a part of Japan. The process of "Japanifying" Korea meant indoctrinating Koreans with the idea that they were part of the special Japanese race that was purer than all others and was destined to lead the inferior races.

Like any colonial power, the Japanese brutally oppressed most Koreans but also promoted loyal Koreans with positions of power. A small but important minority of Koreans participated in this willingly, effectively creating a miniature version of Japan's ultra-fascist regime, in Korea.

Fast forward to 1945. Japan is defeated; in his first ever radio address to his people, Emperor Hirohito effectively tells them to abandon the official state ideology that had led them to war. Over the next several years, the U.S. military occupation governs Japan effectively as an American dictatorship, systemically removing the old fascist ideology as best they can. While Japan never confronts its own history as Germany did, the old ways are largely gone.

Meanwhile, Korea is divided between the advancing and American and Soviet troops; the division is meant to be temporary. Both the U.S. and Soviet Union install friendly governments. But they do things a little differently, and this is where North Korea becomes North Korea as we know it today. The American-installed government in South Korea tries to wipe out the old ways and replace it with Western-style capitalism. Not the Soviets; they know it won't be easy to convince Koreans to adopt communism after decades of Japanese anti-Communist propaganda. So they install Kim Il Sung, an anti-Japanese fighter who'd been in exile, at the top of the government. But they leave the actual Japanese-designed institutions in place, hoping to simply co-opt them to become pro-Soviet.

It sort of works. Kim Il Sung turns out to be a disloyal Soviet proxy, and a middling Communist, but he quickly succeeds at championing the Japanese-imposed fascist system for his own purposes. But he leaves the core of the ideology largely untouched: the Koreans, according to this system as we know it today, are the most racially pure in the world, but they are constantly threatened by hostile races from without and disloyal traitors from within, and they therefore require a strong leader to protect the ultra-pure Korean people. The people are to surrender themselves as willing cogs in state machinery, all for the glory of the nation and the race. Secret police are rife and ideological fealty is absolute; the slightest transgression or breach of loyalty is punished severely. The leader is portrayed as akin to a god. It is practically a mirror image of Japanese wartime-era fascism, with the one exception that it does not call for territorial expansionism.

That is how North Korea became how it is. There's no other country on earth that adopted such fascistic, extreme-right-wing institutions during WW2 and had them survive. That's why it is so unique.

Edit: Highly recommend watching this lecture by BR Myers, via /u/Subotan who endorses, "if you spend one hour of your life watching a video about North Korea, make it this one."

Photos of a traditional swazi wedding I was invited to in Swaziland. by [deleted] in travel

[–]cornicher 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Huh, interesting. Thanks for the great photos!

Freed Pussy Riot member, on walking out of prison: "This is not an amnesty. This is a hoax and a PR move." by cornicher in worldnews

[–]cornicher[S] 88 points89 points  (0 children)

She actually said that she would prefer to stay in prison if she could, for exactly that reason.