THREAD: some thoughts on the Mt. Kumgang visit
IMO the most notable line was: “He made a sharp criticism of the very wrong, dependent policy of the predecessors who were going to rely on others when the country was not strong enough." Here's why.
nknews.org/2019/09/if-dip…
IMO the most notable line was: “He made a sharp criticism of the very wrong, dependent policy of the predecessors who were going to rely on others when the country was not strong enough." Here's why.
nknews.org/2019/09/if-dip…
Kim's explicit criticism towards the 'predecessors (선임자)' is something to keep an eye on, in terms of his domestic legitimacy. 'Predecessors' may be referring to officials, but criticizing the inter-K policy is bound to also mean that Kim Jong Il's policy was "wrong" too.
This is a rare thing to see in N.Korean politics. Not unheard of, but rare. One of the guiding principles of N.Korea's Suryong system (수령제) is the myth of the infallible (무오) leader - as in the the leader who guides the North Korean socialist revolution is never wrong.
The constructed belief in the might, intelligence and love of the leader enables North Korea to be framed as a "socio-political life/organism (사회정치적생명체/유기체)" led by the leader & the Party, which Kim Il Sung conceptualized and Kim Jong Il theorized.
The death/exit of a leader and successions in socialist countries are always a potential domestic risk. The vast majority of the successors have dealt with it by making amends to the policies that are perceived to be the predecessors' mistakes - many times termed as 'reforms.'
But N.Korean leaders and sons went for a different strategy - b/c otherwise it would hurt the legitimacy of the 'infallible leader.' So rather, Kim Jong Il followed Kim Il Sung's dying injunctions(유훈) & Kim Jong Un made the slogan 'Kimilsungia-Kimjongilia'(김일성-김정일주의).
In other socialist countries, the successor builds his authority by taking it away from the predecessor. In North Korea, the successor grants the authority to the predecessor and takes the actual political power as a reward.
So what does it mean that KJU explicitly criticized the predecessors' policy?
We would have to wait until there are multiple statements like this to see it as an intentional move, but from what I see now at least, could mean two complete opposite:
We would have to wait until there are multiple statements like this to see it as an intentional move, but from what I see now at least, could mean two complete opposite:
Kim is 1) comfortable taking some authority away from KJI as KJI's 'aura' in NK isn't helping or 2) is confident, feeling he has already earned enough domestic legitimacy to move beyond the older framework of Suryong system. Or sth else. Let me know if you have other guesses.
Would Kim Jong Un be willing to follow Gorbachev’s footsteps? He’d know it’s a dangerous bet. But we’ll see.
