Which organization is more evil?

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

?

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

I don't know useful the exercise is of tallying up "evil" but I say the Worker's Party pips Daesh, mainly because you can do a lot more damage with a powerful state apparatus behind you.

[Virginiá]

I would say ISIS, because they are extremely brutal & evil almost by design, and reinforced by an uncompromising devotion to a seriously flawed interpretation of the Qur'an.

North Korea's leaders just seem like cold, calculating ruthless people who have little qualms about barbaric treatment but don't actively seek it just for kicks or other misc reasons.

[dead0man]

I don't know useful the exercise is of tallying up "evil" but I say the Worker's Party pips Daesh, mainly because you can do a lot more damage with a powerful state apparatus behind you.

That's what I was thinking too.  Daesh may perhaps be a more pure evil, but they are small potatoes next to the damage the Kims are doing.

[Sumner 1868]

ISIS members regard there actions as morally sound, making them less evil yet more dangerous and terrifying.

[DavidB.]

The scale of North Korean atrocities is larger because of their state power, but the regime basically consists of thoroughly corrupt apparatchiks clinging to their power. ISIS, on the other hand, is much more ideological and deliberately picks the most brutal, inhumane way to treat other human beings just because they think it is just and because they like it. I think that is much more evil.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

In the greater context, I'd say North Korea. ISIS is a flash in the pan. North Korea (and the vile combination of feudalism/communism) is a much more evil ideology.

[TNF]

Well, the Workers' Party of Korea, in spite of it's bureaucratic leadership caste, has managed to develop what was once a colonial backwater into a modern, industrial state with a highly educated population that enjoys a degree of social equality unlike that of other states facing similar material conditions. The planned, nationalized economy provided for rapid industrial growth during the Cold War, transforming what was previously a largely agrarian, peasant society into an industrial one, and lifting millions of people out of dire poverty in the process. While modern society in North Korea leaves quite a lot to be desired, the problems facing North Korea are a combination of isolation (imposed upon North Korea by the United States) leading to a degree of material scarcity, and bureaucratic misrule by the Stalinized WPK and the Kim family in particular.

The problems facing North Korea could be solved by a political revolution there which would dispose of the Kim family and the Stalinist bureaucrats and instill a workers' and peasants' government there, an event that would no doubt have repercussions in neo-colonial South Korea and the Chinese deformed workers' state as well. Nevertheless, North Korea represents a historically progressive formation in that it is free from capitalist domination and control. The same cannot be said of ISIS/ISIL, which scorns education, embraces reactionary religious fundamentalism, and seeks not to construct a new society but simply Islamicize the old. 

[DavidB.]

Well, the Workers' Party of Korea, in spite of it's bureaucratic leadership caste, has managed to develop what was once a colonial backwater into a modern, industrial state with a highly educated population that enjoys a degree of social equality unlike that of other states facing similar material conditions. The planned, nationalized economy provided for rapid industrial growth during the Cold War, transforming what was previously a largely agrarian, peasant society into an industrial one, and lifting millions of people out of dire poverty in the process. While modern society in North Korea leaves quite a lot to be desired, the problems facing North Korea are a combination of isolation (imposed upon North Korea by the United States) leading to a degree of material scarcity, and bureaucratic misrule by the Stalinized WPK and the Kim family in particular.

The problems facing North Korea could be solved by a political revolution there which would dispose of the Kim family and the Stalinist bureaucrats and instill a workers' and peasants' government there, an event that would no doubt have repercussions in neo-colonial South Korea and the Chinese deformed workers' state as well. Nevertheless, North Korea represents a historically progressive formation in that it is free from capitalist domination and control. The same cannot be said of ISIS/ISIL, which scorns education, embraces reactionary religious fundamentalism, and seeks not to construct a new society but simply Islamicize the old. 

when you look at the difference between North Korea and South Korea, don't you ever think: "damn, my ideology has failed. Time to move on"?

[TNF]

Well, the Workers' Party of Korea, in spite of it's bureaucratic leadership caste, has managed to develop what was once a colonial backwater into a modern, industrial state with a highly educated population that enjoys a degree of social equality unlike that of other states facing similar material conditions. The planned, nationalized economy provided for rapid industrial growth during the Cold War, transforming what was previously a largely agrarian, peasant society into an industrial one, and lifting millions of people out of dire poverty in the process. While modern society in North Korea leaves quite a lot to be desired, the problems facing North Korea are a combination of isolation (imposed upon North Korea by the United States) leading to a degree of material scarcity, and bureaucratic misrule by the Stalinized WPK and the Kim family in particular.

The problems facing North Korea could be solved by a political revolution there which would dispose of the Kim family and the Stalinist bureaucrats and instill a workers' and peasants' government there, an event that would no doubt have repercussions in neo-colonial South Korea and the Chinese deformed workers' state as well. Nevertheless, North Korea represents a historically progressive formation in that it is free from capitalist domination and control. The same cannot be said of ISIS/ISIL, which scorns education, embraces reactionary religious fundamentalism, and seeks not to construct a new society but simply Islamicize the old. 

when you look at the difference between North Korea and South Korea, don't you ever think: "damn, my ideology has failed. Time to move on"?

The South Korean economy was built up by similar methods to that of the North Korean economy, actually. If you look into the economic history of South Korea, you'll see a lot of state planning, a lot of state-owned enterprises, and of course, copious amounts of aid from a foreign superpower. The difference is that the superpower that funded North Korean development programs and showered it with technical inputs collapsed in the early 1990s, whereas the colonial power pulling the strings across the border didn't.

If anything, South Korea likewise illustrates the superiority of planning mechanisms and state-led development projects over purely market-based schemes. It's telling that the South Korean economy has been fairly stagnant (relative to the past) and never grown as fast as it did during the heyday of state intervention since that was curtailed. Of course the other big problem there is that South Korea effectively functions as a neo-colonial regime of the US, severely limiting it's range of available options and prostrating it's economy to American imperialism.

[DavidB.]

The South Korean economy was built up by similar methods to that of the North Korean economy, actually. If you look into the economic history of South Korea, you'll see a lot of state planning, a lot of state-owned enterprises, and of course, copious amounts of aid from a foreign superpower. The difference is that the superpower that funded North Korean development programs and showered it with technical inputs collapsed in the early 1990s, whereas the colonial power pulling the strings across the border didn't.

If anything, South Korea likewise illustrates the superiority of planning mechanisms and state-led development projects over purely market-based schemes. It's telling that the South Korean economy has been fairly stagnant (relative to the past) and never grown as fast as it did during the heyday of state intervention since that was curtailed. Of course the other big problem there is that South Korea effectively functions as a neo-colonial regime of the US, severely limiting it's range of available options and prostrating it's economy to American imperialism.

I don't even disagree that state intervention can help at making an economy grow, and, indeed, that careful state planning has helped South Korea at achieving its current level of prosperity. But the point is that the means of production in South Korea are generally not in the hands of the state. Nobody said South Korea is a paradise of the free market. The country is corporatist. However, it is still a capitalist country, with the government intervening in what is fundamentally a free market. And it works. South Korea is as prosperous as many European countries. Meanwhile, North Korea is a hellhole. Do you think the working class is better off in North Korea than in South Korea?

It is also incorrect to implicitly state that North Korea and South Korea were in roughly similar positions before the fall of the Soviet Union (which itself, of course, largely happened because of the fact that a socialist economy does not work).

That last "big problem" you mention is obviously not something with which you are going to convince non-socialists/capitalist pigs

[tpfkaw]

Islamic State, because it's more expansionist and conducts more terrorist attacks outside its borders.

[TheDeadFlagBlues]

Well, the Workers' Party of Korea, in spite of it's bureaucratic leadership caste, has managed to develop what was once a colonial backwater into a modern, industrial state with a highly educated population that enjoys a degree of social equality unlike that of other states facing similar material conditions. The planned, nationalized economy provided for rapid industrial growth during the Cold War, transforming what was previously a largely agrarian, peasant society into an industrial one, and lifting millions of people out of dire poverty in the process. While modern society in North Korea leaves quite a lot to be desired, the problems facing North Korea are a combination of isolation (imposed upon North Korea by the United States) leading to a degree of material scarcity, and bureaucratic misrule by the Stalinized WPK and the Kim family in particular.

The problems facing North Korea could be solved by a political revolution there which would dispose of the Kim family and the Stalinist bureaucrats and instill a workers' and peasants' government there, an event that would no doubt have repercussions in neo-colonial South Korea and the Chinese deformed workers' state as well. Nevertheless, North Korea represents a historically progressive formation in that it is free from capitalist domination and control. The same cannot be said of ISIS/ISIL, which scorns education, embraces reactionary religious fundamentalism, and seeks not to construct a new society but simply Islamicize the old.  

have you been kidnapped by a cult?

it's really sad that you think that this is the case. i hope that, in time, you realize the inanity of this post. it is no longer 1965. it's patently clear to anyone with a pulse that north korea's distribution system has failed to provide for its populace and that, indeed, this is intentional. while it's interesting that north korea's economic trajectory outpaced south korea, it's an academic curiosity and little else. north korea is hardly electrified, its population is malnourished etc.

why not disown north korea and embrace vietnam or cuba? i cannot comprehend why you think that a country that has disowned marx and lenin is worth defending as a "worker's state".

[dead0man]

I can't believe he actually thinks that post is true, there is just way too many things wrong with it.  Could we have another Napoleon on our hands?