Now, the 2015 JCPOA between Iran, the US, China, Russia, Germany, France and Britain, a deal that agreed on limiting Iranian nuclear activity in return for the lifting of crippling international economic sanctions looks as if it may be coming to an end as Trump warns the US will abandon the deal on 12 May if his concerns are not addressed.
It’s too soon to say whether this will constitute an excuse to invade Iran and spark a hot conflict — but it will likely mean resumed economic sanctions on Iran for not playing ball with U.S. & Israeli foreign policy.
If we just look to how Iraq under Saddam Hussein received arms and support from Washington to attack and invade Iran. This de facto agreement, encouraged the Iraqi leader to assume that collaboration between nationalist Iraq and imperial Washington reflected a shared common agenda. Subsequently Baghdad believed that they had tacit US support in a territorial dispute with Kuwait. When Saddam invaded, the US bombed, devastated, invaded, occupied and partitioned Iraq.
The attempt by Iraq to collaborate with Washington in the 1980’s against its nationalist neighbor Iran, led to the invasion, the destruction of the country, the killing of thousands of secular leaders including Saddam Hussein as well as the entire secular and scientific intelligentsia, and the transformation of Iraq into a toothless vassal state of the empire.
With the elections of Donald Trump, the US rejected the agreement (‘it’s the worst deal ever’) and in compliance with the Israeli Prime Minister B. Netanyahu’s military agenda, demanded the total restoration of sanctions, the dismantling of Iran’s entire military defenses and its submission to the US, Israeli and Saudi Arabian dictates in the Middle East.
In other words, President Trump discarded the agreement in opposition to all the major countries in Europe and Asia, in favor of Israel’s demands to isolate, disarm and attack Iran and impose a puppet regime in Tehran.
“The strategic goal is disarmament in order to facilitate military and political intervention leading up to and beyond defeat, occupation, regime change; the impositions of a‘client regime’ to facilitate the pillage of economic resources and the securing of military bases, international alignment with the US empire and a military springboard for further conquests against neighbors and independent adversaries.” — Prof. James Petras
These recent allegations from Israel backed by the U.S., in light of recent Iranian military posturing following the April 7th Syria strikes seems more suited to a “back off” gesture from the Western alliance, in essence, saying “we can and will hold your feet to the fire” (by reimposing crippling sanctions) over these allegations. If they have any further, graver, implications in targeting Iran — these will unfold with time.
While I am principally an individualist, unlike most sworn individualists (who often see all people as intrinsically, unequivocally equal; “the sanctity of the individual” and so on) and proportion their politics to this maxim, I believe that at a certain level of heritable intelligence (namely biological IQ: intelligence quotient) a person’s predisposition towards individualism declines sharply — and therefore the need for benevolent collectivism is an (inevitable) necessity in swaying these groups of people of lower intelligence that are going to take on the beliefs of someone or something sooner or later — the crux of my argument is that lower intelligence people are an ideological power vacuum — Why? It’s simple enough — they lack the reasonable individualistic capacity to be resistant to, and critical of malevolent, monolithic, collective thought and its resulting politics — they, quite simply, are lacking the intelligence to discern and exercise sensible, pragmatic individualism: an important factor in holding together a civilization and ensuring its sustainability. The history of these populations’ civilization concurs with this assertion.
The need for parity between ruler and ruled.
If an electorate lacks the intelligence to “connect the dots”, sees only its own interests (due to lack of creative and/or empathetic vision to see benevolent collective goals) — it both lacks comprehension of itself and others and falls prey to predatory politicians and rulers in all their forms.
These are rulers who will outclass such an electorate in intelligence, knowledge, practicality, conscientiousness, time preference, and just about every other trait that is a reliable predictor of success and influence in its numerable forms.
We are seeing this more and more, the Ashkenazi Jews currently rule over whites and all racial groups beneath measured by genetic IQ.
I believe, unlike the absolute assertions of Jordan Peterson that suggest it is only intelligence that accounts for Jewish influence, that, at least some element of Jewish in-group consolidation is the reason the highest echelons of power are dominated by them. There are simply too many smart non-Jewish ethnic whites for this to go unaccounted for me to believe Jewish dominance has no environmental causes whatsoever.
This, mixed in with the fact Jews came to occupy influential financial positions first before anyone else (due to Christian Europeans being unable to partake in usury historically) this helps to explain why Ashkenazi Jews dominate today — they got into positions first due to the lucky societal circumstances, and then consolidated their positions, with an element of persecution and the fact Jews were relatively ostracized, these positions likely were passed on in a nepotistic way; more so than not with the in-group in mind.
Also, most of the immoral, extraordinarily powerful so-called “Jews” are actually Judeo-Masonic, Solomonic adherents — by extension, Satanists, this has served to totally mischaracterise Jews altogether. The people who are responsible for the Globalist agenda are not real Jews, they may identify as Jews publicly, but they have Masonic inspiration. For example, their very non-Jewish symbol, the “Star of David”, is a Satanic, Masonic symbol, many half-Jews have fallen for this false non-biblical imagery and have followed the so-called state of “Israel”; thinking it is a Biblical revelation.
See how the Judeo-Masonic elites are obsessed with Israel for non-Jewish reasons.
Stop opposing the broad ethno-religious group that is Judaism, it’s simply not the case that a broad group of some multi-million Jews are colluding against the world, to suggest so makes little sense. More accurately, a small sect of Solomon-praising, Satanic-Masonic “Jews” are to blame for the sheer misrepresentation of the Jewish community, and all conspiratorial behavior that has seemingly come from a broadly “Jewish” establishment.
“Masonry is a search after Light. That search leads us directly back, as you see, to the Kabalah. In that ancient and little understood medley of absurdity and philosophy, the Initiate will find the source of many doctrines; and may in time come to understand the Hermetic philosophers, the Alchemists, all the anti-Papal thinkers of the Middle Age, and Emanuel Swedenborg. Everything scientific and grand in the religious dreams of all the Illuminati, Jacob Boehme, Swedenborg, Saint-Martin, and others, is borrowed from the Kabalah; all the Masonic associations owe to it their Secrets and Symbols.”
— Albert Pike, Morals and Dogma, 33° freemason and founder of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry.
This so-called “light” is, in essence, reverence of Lucifer not as the devil, but as a liberator, a guardian or guiding spirit, or even the true god as opposed to God (YHWH).
Judeo-Masons are obsessed with Israel in the context of Solomon; but look at how Solomon was addressed in the Bible:
“The Lord was angry with Solomon, because his heart was turned from the Lord God of Israel.” — 1 Kings 11:9
The charge against Solomon was that ‘his heart was not perfect,’ or wholly devoted to the YHWH, that he ‘went not fully’ after the YHWH. His was a case of halting between two opinions, or rather, of trying to hold both at once. He wanted to be a worshiper of YHWH and of these idols also — It is clear to see how Satanic Freemasonry is a combined religion of pagan Gods and the Judaic God, this is why the elites identify as “Jews” today, but aren’t truly so.
Jewish Mysticism is not true Judaism, it’s a non-biblical offshoot of what is sanctioned in scripture. The entry of the Kabbalah— developed roughly around the 12th century, derived from the heretical, non-inspired text, the Talmud.
Solomon the Wise was an Israelite, he was a Jew, but he turned away from God (YHWH) and pursued Satanism. Solomon went after Ashtoreth the goddess of the Zidonians, a Goddess connected with fertility, sexuality, and war. Her symbols were the lion, the horse, the sphinx, the dove, and a star within a circle indicating the planet Venus. Pictorial representations often show her naked. She has been known as the deified morning and/or evening star (Luciferian symbology). Solomon also began to praise Moloch/Milcom/Molech (as the Judeo-Masonic Elites do annually at the Bohemian Grove). Solomon built a high place for Chemosh, the abomination of Moab, in the hill that is before Jerusalem, and for Molech, the abomination of the children of Ammon.
Judeo-Masonic Ashkenazi “Jews” closest competitors, those most genetically similar to them, are Caucasian European whites. If whites are removed from the equation as a major demographic, then the genetic (and thus influence) gap will become wider than ever — this is what those in power are attempting to do; diminish “whiteness” in all its forms — they know the significant predictive role of race in political influence and socioeconomic systems, and are (understandably) putting all of their money into brainwashing people to be blind to this reality while carrying out their dysgenic agenda behind the scenes.
As a result of this agenda, such a dysgenic electorate will be more susceptible to emotional arguments, logical fallacies, compartmentalization, designed dialectics, irrationality, superstitions, hysteric trends, and so on — the funny thing is, we can already see how these “minority groups” are already predisposed to all of these things, yet are protected groups nonetheless — and, right before our eyes, are rapidly replacing whites in Western nations as the new dominant population with an army of liberal “progressives” employed to assure us that this will “enrich” us, all the evidence points to the contrary.
Varying intelligence: why collective thought will always have a place in human society, whether we like it or not.
It’s about mitigation — rather than hoping for a sociopolitical Utopia, I believe reasonable mitigation and sensible policy-making is enough to deliver a society that can flourish.
TL:DR — Just as individual thought will always exist relative to collective thought and vice versa; it’s a seesaw based on aforementioned factors. The further towards base consciousness a population gets the more negatively collectivist it becomes, taking on often bad ideas in lieu of their own.
The role of benevolent collectivism (such as the group-think religiosity of cultural and ethical Christianity) for susceptible groups is deliberately overlooked in postmodernist society — because certain globalist forces want to unilaterally over-represent in society genetically and/or culturally limited “individuals” that, on average, simply lack said mental faculties, know-how, background etc (due to numerous factors including historic inbreeding among many others) to represent themselves as capable individuals, and thus are more receptive to collectivism and the centralization of the state. They’re bending over backwards to represent these people: granting copious welfare, slanting society to the their defense against all sensibility, bringing in compelled speech and taboos, white guilt and so forth — it’s quite simply a bubble for a protected group, that, without such an outrageously preferential bubble – would not get very far at all.
The globalist elite want us to believe that “everyone is equal” to all other concerned citizens regardless of significant civilization-defining traits such as intelligence. Hence the ideological over-representation of Cultural Marxist ideology across all institutions owned by the trendsetters.
In lower IQ people — traits such as gullibility, a lack of receptiveness to rationality, and a predisposition towards unthinking group-think collectivism abounds, all this has a biological basis in race. Populations that operate at a more basic consciousness, i.e. concerned with R-brain matters such as sex, domination, resources on the group or individual basis, lacking the empathetic foresight to perceive and act upon wider concerns.
It is not entirely environmental as the Jew-funded Cultural Marxist institutions will insist.
Guess what? Europe will become a continent dominated by low IQ “individuals” that have just as much of a right to vote as rational, moral, and savvy individuals — the UK alone will become a Muslim country by 2050 if current demographic trends persist due to the proliferate compound nature of R-selective populations: by which point, proxy-totalitarianism will have a firmer foothold than ever.
This is bad news for the individual but great news for the centralized state.
If we look back to the societies that are today deemed “antiquated” and the “wrong side of history”, we can see various successful, influential classical societies and groups that practiced eugenics, Rome, Ashkenazi Jewry, ancient Greeks incl. Sparta, and so on. Even one of the Godfathers of philosophy, Plato, suggested the benefits selective mating to produce a guardian class.
Furthermore, we can see how Western Christian societies averted dysgenics by making legal provisions against birth of inferior human beings, this was notably promulgated in Western European culture by the Christian Council of Agde in 506, which forbade marriage between cousins. Something dysgenic populations never really did to an effective extent, the genetic rift thus widened.
Up until the mid-late 20th century, genetic discrimination such as compulsory sterilization of persons with genetic defects, the killing of the institutionalized and, specifically, segregation and genocide of races perceived as inferior was a wide societal norm, the accepted norm was that there are differences between certain groups of humans, whether we wanted to accept that or not for humanitarian reasons was, quite rightly, a secondary matter.
This article, while cautious to frame such practices and conventions as supremacist, malevolent, or otherwise, hopes to illustrate that a dysgenic society will lead to more suffering and conflict than a society with eugenicist practices ever will; and the evidence supports it.
Drawing the line as to what defines an “individual” in relation to sociopolitical systems.
Because a comprehensive system of natural selection no longer exists, (even culturally now) — the distinction between genetics that are passed on by merit and genetics passed on with the help of welfare and so on — is nonexistent, we have R-selective groups being able to pass on their genes where in a truly open, decentralized society this wouldn’t be able to happen.
In simple terms in application to political systems — smart people are often more individualist (thus, conservative and nationalistic), lower intelligence groups are less individualist (more predisposed to group-think, socialism), the role of mass-indoctrination may be able to net some fringes of higher intelligence groups but generally the core principle remains.
I propose we can relatively reliably categorize people into “capable individuals” and “incapable individuals”, largely reliably on the five racial groups and dysgenic/eugenic traits, gender, background, but also (albeit somewhat less reliably) within these groups based on class. (Cultural Marxism is all about denouncing the terms “categorical” or “general” but these are perfectly fine terms, used in the correct context).
While these assertions of justifiable partition certainly sounds collectivist and an affront to individual rights — race realism and the taxonomic significance between biological groups is founded in science; and a factor worthy of serious consideration when regarding any system of social and political arrangement.
I’ve written a whole article (called “the truth about racism”) detailing the significance of race and intelligence, so I won’t go into too much detail here, but here are a few points that help illustrate my argument:
Sub-Saharan Africans are the only group of people without detailed mythology or creation stories.
If we cannot see the influence of race and IQ on upholding individual representation, we will fall to absolutist collectivist politics, especially as the “migrant crisis” rapidly undermines Western population of capable (higher IQ) individuals with incapable (lower IQ) individuals.
Representing the voting rights of incapable (low IQ) people is dangerous, I propose an IQ and general/applied knowledge test for eligibility to political vote. While this kind of test cannot determine moral character, at least it can determine intelligence.
Lower intelligence groups are almost always going to organize towards the characteristics of the mob, fragmentation, and group-think, whereas higher intelligence groups tend to represent their own thoughts and interpretations and have awareness of benevolent collectivism, thus shaking-off most inclinations to representing monolithic thought.
They will almost always make irresponsible, hysterical, passionate, and irrational decisions with their rights to liberty, democracy, and self-determination, by extension empowering the state; not themselves or the wider capable individual.
At a higher level of intelligence, the ability for someone to think for themselves increases, hence the commonality of individualism and democracy in Western nations occupied by races of higher overall IQ (even if Western democracies and systems that champion the individual are often subverted — the general attitude towards individualism is more common in people of higher intelligence than without).
In my opinion, this is where the role of independent collective thought such as the Bible comes in, while you can absolutely take on the teachings on your own terms, regardless of your intelligence — the importance of casting a collectivist thought process that engages with several fundamental principles such as “do not not steal”, “do not kill”, “do not lie”, etc based on the threat of eternal damnation is the only way to communicate to a group of people not (easily) able to operate on a rational level of thought, the Bible does this exquisitely, it uses the threat of death mixed in with something that cannot be possibly tangibly understood (a deity), the perfect enforcing combination for keeping susceptible populations in line.
The decline of Christianity as a (mostly) positive force of collectivist thought has spelled disaster for the West.
As Christianity has been mocked and destroyed in Western culture at the hands of Jewish influence, we see susceptible (lower intelligence) populations previously protected by the positive collective standards of the Bible now become receptive to new “progressive” hive-mind ideas, it really is one religion exchanged for another more materialistic one, this new nihilistic religion as Christianity’s replacement lacks any direction.
Instead, it opens vulnerable populations up to sophistic ideas that, ultimately, reduce essential liberties, that, without the safeguarding ideals of collectivist Biblical faith, have now been able to infiltrate and infect Western culture.
A hopeful Kim Jong-Un stated that he wanted to pursue “permanent peace”, adding “we will adopt the Panmunjom declarations while the whole world is watching us. I believe the declaration will never let us repeat our past mistakes.”
South Korean President Moon praised the “precious agreement” and declared a “new era of peace”, pledging “there will be no more war on the Korean peninsula.”
Scenes of the two leaders strolling together have, for the past sixty years or so, been an unthinkable sight through the Western rose-tinted glasses, in reality Korea has wanted to join forces and boot the Western imperialists, but the U.S. has had clout in South Korea long enough to obstruct this.
That changed today as the two leaders embraced a watershed moment.
Kim’s political pivot to warmer relations with a longtime rival and U.S. proxy/ally (South Korea) is evident that Kim wants to preserve North Korea and boot the imperialists out, but the DPRK, up until recently, has been wary of dealing with a South Korea directed by U.S. foreign policy-making.
Recent developments suggest the U.S.’s grip on the South has slipped — and so Kim, likely with careful advice and guidance from close allies such as China, has made his move to cool the climate.
How long this will last is not apparent, when Moon is replaced once more by a U.S. favoring puppet, the status quo may return, for now, a period of respite — or perhaps a sign of a permanent decline of U.S. influence in the region? Time will tell.
The demonization of North Korea: a brief history.
The demonization of North Korea by the United States government continued unrelentingly, only now in 2018 have the Koreans been able to take control of their own destiny.
George W. Bush used his first State of the Union address on January 29, 2002 to brand North Korea, along with former allies Iran and Iraq, as “the world’s most dangerous regimes” who now now form a threatening “axis of evil.”
Unbeknownst to the public, because it was intended to have remained a secret, was the fact that this claimed president presented a “Nuclear Posture Review” report to Congress only three weeks earlier, on January 8, which ordered the Pentagon to prepare contingency plans for use of nuclear weapons.
The first designated targets for nuclear attack were his newly identified members of the “axis of evil,” (including the DPRK) along with four other lucky nations as well – Syria, Libya, Russia, and China.
That this is nothing short of a policy of ultimate terror remains unaddressed in the U.S. media.
2018: One step closer to a Korean peninsula free from U.S. dominion?
As one of the few countries without a Rothschild central bank, North Korea is a total unabashed nonconformist, and, as a result, targeting the DPRK is naturally an objective in U.S. foreign policy — in fact, North Korea being a bit of a rogue state (although still partially under China’s wing) has also been a blessing for the U.S. warmongers.
In keeping North Korea as the bogeyman of the Far East, the U.S. can continue to build-up its military presence at the behest of “peacekeeping” which, while claimed to be provisional against Jong-Un’s regime, has a troubling permanence — and is actually intended to corner and target more relevant powers such as China and Russia.
The North Korea “problem” disinformation campaign (and resultant U.S. aggressive rhetoric) has been escalated ever since the South Korean peacemaker Jae-in came into office in early 2017.
For example, within the last year, U.S. Defense Secretary Mattis engaged with hysterical rhetoric, stating that:
“North Korea has accelerated the threat that it poses to its neighbors and the world through its illegal and unnecessary missile and nuclear weapons programs …” The situation had developed a “new urgency.”
This is why with the surmounting pressure from the U.S. and an ever-strengthening case for an invasion of North Korea, U.S. military escalation, and with building pressure on the Chinese — Kim was wise to amend relations and keep the U.S. interventionists out of the equation, to keep his only strong ally, China, happy — and to preserve his dynasty, which, if cut-off from its dependencies and protectorates would quickly wither from the inside out; more isolated than ever without recourse.
South Korean President Moon Jae-in less compliant with U.S. interests.
Jae-in was elected on a peace platform by the South Korean people. Moon’s predecessor Park Geun-hye, a puppet, did the U.S.’s bidding — until she was impeached and then sentenced to 24 years earlier this month for abuse of power, bribery, coercion, and leaking government secrets, with some claims that she took $3.5 million in bribes from a spy agency.
As a non-puppet, or at least a leader less pliable and less receptive to U.S. interests, Moon Jae-in’s peacemaker policy stands in stark contrast with that of Western-controlled Japan, which continues to involve itself with U.S. foreign policy, framing North Korea as the reckless, uncooperative state it patently isn’t.
I am allowing Japan & South Korea to buy a substantially increased amount of highly sophisticated military equipment from the United States.
North Korea was never the “threat” the West portrayed it to be.
North Korea both wanted unification ever since they were freed of vassalization under the Japanese Empire after WW2, the U.S. imperialists moved in to seize Korea and a war ensued, the result was a divided peninsula, one side controlled by U.S. interests, the other by North Korean, supported as a sovereign state by China and Russia.
In the fallout of the post Korean war, North Korea armed itself to the teeth, and like any sovereign nation would be — was hostile to those who sought to subvert it. Kim going the nuclear route is an act of self-defense if anything. While by no means is the Kim dynasty perfect, no side of the political equation is.
To look at things objectively, Korea is better off multi-polar with cooperation between the sides, an amicably decentralized group of cooperative states — as opposed to the U.S. seeking to control all states for sake of “World Order” and “Peace”. At least the Kims rule honestly, they don’t hide their totalitarianism (an inevitability of political power) like all the so-called “democracies” do.
Kanye West sums it up, “decentralize”, the two Korean nations making their own decisions suggests it:
The Korean tensions were and continue to be desirable for the elites, it keeps the peninsula divided and brings South Korea closer to the U.S. sphere of influence, enabling the South to be a front-line launchpad and encirclement base for Western imperialism around China and Russia — and as a general power play in the Far East.
Conclusively, to Washington, South Korea going it alone and talking peace is undesirable, it breaks the strawman narrative that the U.S. needs to be militarily involved in the Far East and pursue full spectrum dominance.
Retaliatory moves such as when the US sent more nukes to Guam, and put the state of Hawaii on a full alert that a “ballistic missile was inbound” were part of an effort to reignite tensions, perhaps even to convince Moon Jae-in that Kim was a “madman” with his “finger on the button” — therefore obstructing peace-talks and retaining South Korea as a fearfully compliant proxy.
The U.S. is a two-sided coin of good cop, bad cop imperialism.
The U.S. intervening in Korea is nothing new, the U.S., over its history, has militarily intervened over 400 times, covertly thousands of times, in over one hundred nations. The U.S. is a globalist apparatus.
Virtually all these interventions have been lawless. It has bombed at least eighteen nations since it dropped Atomic bombs on Japan in 1945. It has used chemical warfare against Southeast Asia, and has provided chemical warfare agents for use by other nations such as Iraq. It has used biological warfare against China, North Korea, and Cuba. The Koreans are quite aware of most of this history. Most U.S. Americans are not. But now the U.S. has declared a unilateral “terrorist” war on the whole world.
Now that the two nations of Korea are at the negotiating table, the U.S.’s policing role in the region seems more redundant than ever. Let’s hope this is a win for self-governing nationalism and a defeat for monolithic globalism.
Understanding Korea: A case of perspective.
S. Brian Wilson from Global Research is a Vietnam veteran, long-time peace activist, and writer. In an article for the website he discusses the misunderstanding of the Korean situation that clouds the true motives of U.S. foreign policy in the region.
I believe it important for U.S. Americans to place themselves in the position of people living in targeted countries. That North Korea, a nation of 24 million people, i.e., one-twentieth the population of the U.S., many of them poor, a land slightly larger in area than the U.S. state of Pennsylvania, continues to be one of the most demonized nations and least understood, totally perplexes the Korean people. It is worthwhile to seek an understanding of their perspective.
I recently visited that nation and talked with a number of her citizens. I traveled 900 ground miles through six of North Korea’s nine provinces, as well as spending time in Pyongyang, the capital, and several other cities. I talked with dozens of people from all walks of life. Though times have been hard for North Koreans, especially in the 1990s, they long ago proudly rebuilt all of their dozens of cities, thousands of villages, and hundreds of dykes and dams destroyed during the war.
U.S. interference into the sovereign life of Korea immediately upon the 1945 surrender of the hated Japanese, who had occupied the Korean Peninsula for forty years, is one of the major crimes of the Twentieth Century, from which the Korean people have never recovered. (SEE “United States Government War Crimes,” Spring 2002 – issue # 1 of Global Outlook). From a North Korean’s perspective they
(1) have vigorously opposed the unlawful and egregious division of their country from day one to the present,
(2) were blamed for starting the “Korean War” which in fact had been a struggle between a minority of wealthy Koreans supporting continued colonization in collaboration with the U.S. and those majority Koreans who opposed it,
(3) proudly and courageously held the U.S. and its “crony U.N. allies” to a stalemate during the “War,” and
(4) have been tragically and unfairly considered a hostile nation ever since. They have not forgotten the forty years of Japanese occupation that preceded the U.S. imposed division and subsequent occupation that continues in the South. They deeply yearn for reunification of their historically unified culture.
Everyone I talked with, dozens and dozens of folks, lost one if not many more family members during the war, especially from the continuous bombing, much of it incendiary and napalm, deliberately dropped on virtually every space in the country. “Every means of communication, every installation, factory, city, and village” was ordered bombed by General MacArthur in the fall of 1950. It never stopped until the day of the armistice on July 27, 1953. The pained memories of people are still obvious, and their anger at “America” is often expressed, though they were very welcoming and gracious to me. Ten million Korean families remain permanently separated from each other due to the military patrolled and fenced dividing line spanning 150 miles across the entire Peninsula.
Let us make it very clear here for western readers. North Korea was virtually totally destroyed during the “Korean War.” U.S. General Douglas MacArthur’s architect for the criminal air campaign was Strategic Air Command head General Curtis LeMay who had proudly conducted the earlier March 10 – August 15, 1945 continuous incendiary bombings of Japan that had destroyed 63 major cities and murdered a million citizens. (The deadly Atomic bombings actually killed far fewer people.)
Eight years later, after destroying North Korea’s 78 cities and thousands of her villages, and killing countless numbers of her civilians, LeMay remarked, “Over a period of three years or so we killed off – what – twenty percent of the population.”6 It is now believed that the population north of the imposed 38th Parallel lost nearly a third its population of 8 – 9 million people during the 37-month long “hot” war, 1950 – 1953, perhaps an unprecedented percentage of mortality suffered by one nation due to the belligerance of another.
Virtually every person wanted to know what I thought of Bush’s recent accusation of North Korea as part of an “axis of evil.” Each of the three governments comprising Bush’s “axis of evil” of course immediately condemned the remarks, North Korea being no exception. I shared with them my own outrage and fears, and they seemed relieved to know that not all “Americans” are so cruel and bellicose. As with people in so many other nations with whom the U.S. has treated with hostility, they simply cannot understand why the U.S. is so obsessed with them.
Koreans were relieved to learn that a recent poll had indicated eighty percent of South Koreans were against the U.S. belligerent stance against their northern neighbors. The North Korean government described Bush as a “typical rogue and a kingpin of terrorism” as he was visiting the South in February, only three weeks after presenting his threatening State of the Union address.7 It was also encouraging that the two Koreas resumed quiet diplomatic talks in March just as the U.S. and South Korea were once again conducting their regular, large-scale, joint military exercises so enraging to the North, and to an increasing number of people in the South among the growing reunification movement there.
In the English-language newspaper, The Pyongyang Times, (February 23, 2002) there were articles entitled “US Is Empire of the Devil,” Korea Will Never Be a Threat to the US,” and “Bush’s Remarks Stand Condemned.” Quite frankly, all three of these articles relate a truth about the U.S. that would draw a consensus from many quarters around the world.
While in country, together we listened to Bush’s March 14 Voice of America (VOA) radio chastizement of North Korea. First, he stated that the North’s 200,000 prisoner population was proof of terrible repression. Though I had no way of knowing the number of prisoners in the North, any more than Bush did, I do know that the United States has 2 million prisoners which is similar in per-capita detention rate to that of North Korea if the 200,000 figure is accurate. Furthermore, the U.S. has a minimum of 3 million persons, mostly minority and poor, under state supervision of parole and probation. The U.S. sweeps its class and race problems into prison.
Second, Bush declared that half the population was considered unreliable and, as a result, received less monthly food rations. The Koreans are a proud people living in a Confucian tradition, having rebuilt their nation from virtual total destruction during the Korean war. I did not notice any obvious display of dissent. That some Koreans are desperate due to lack of food, water, and heat, especially in some rural areas, does not necessarily translate into dissent, though some are seeking relief by travel to neighboring countries.
Third, Bush claimed that Koreans who listen to foreign radio are targeted for execution. Together we regularly listened to U.S.VOA radio broadcasts and they freely discussed the content of the broadcasts without fear of reprisals.
Fourth, Bush condemned the DPRK for spending too much on its military, causing food shortages for the people. Note: Again it must be remembered that it was the U.S. that unilaterally divided Korea following the Japanese surrender in August 1945, and subsequently ruled with a military occupation government in the south, overseeing the elimination of virtually the entire popular movement of (majority) opposition to U.S. occupation, murdering hundreds of thousands of people. The consequent Korean civil war that openly raged in 1948-1950 was completely ignored when the U.S. defined the beginning of the Korean War in 1950. The U.S. remains at war with the DPRK, never having signed a peace treaty with her. The war has left a deep scar in the Korean character with a memory that is regularly provoked by continued belligerance directed at the DPRK. The U.S. regularly holds joint military exercises with South Korean military forces aimed at the DPRK. The U.S. retains 37,000 military troops at 100 installations south of the 38th parallel. The U.S. has its largest Asian bombing range where it practices bombs five days a week, fifty-two weeks a year, despite opposition from many South Koreans. And now Bush has identified North Korea as part of an “axis of evil” targeted for nuclear attack. This is no remote idea to North Koreans. The U.S. possesses nuclear weapons on ships and planes in the Pacific region surrounding North Korea. Virtually every nation in this perilous position would be concerned about their defense.
It is worth noting that the United States is the leading military spender in the world resulting in substantial underfunding of its own indispensable social programs.
Fifth, Bush accused the DPRK of selling weapons to other nations. That is like the pot calling the kettle black. The U.S. is by far the largest manufacturer of conventional, nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons in the world. It is also the largest seller of these weapons, and has used conventional (against dozens of nations), biological (Cuba, China, Korea, perhaps others), chemical (Southeast Asia), and nuclear (Japan, and threatened to use them on at least 20 other occasions) weapons. In addition it has armed other nations with these weapons of mass destruction, including Iraq, one of those countries now identified as part of the “axis of evil.” In the year 2000, international arms sales were nearly $37 billion, with the U.S. being directly responsible for just over half of those sales. South Korea was the third largest buyer of weapons from the United States with $3.2 worth of military hardware. And in January 2002, South Korea was seriously contemplating purchasing an additional $3.2 billion worth of 40 F-X fighter jets from U.S. arms giant Boeing.
At the conclusion of this VOA radio broadcast, Koreans and I looked at each other in disbelief. But we also knew that we were in solidarity with each other as part of the human family. When I said goodbye to my new friends we embraced knowing that we live in a single world made up of a rich diversity of ideas and species. We know that we are going to live or die together, and hope that the arrogant and dangerous rhetoric and militarism of the United States will soon end so we can all live in peace. However, for that to happen, there will need to be a dramatic awakening among the people and a corresponding expression of massive nonviolent opposition that will make such threatening behavior impossible to carry out.