Talk:North Korea

Communist

It is patently absurd for Wikipedia to claim North Korea is NOT a Communist state. Wikipedia is now the laughing stock of the Internet. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.16.254.69 (talk) 00:01, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

You keep using that word, I don't think you know what it means. -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs email 00:15, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Where does Wikipedia claim North Korea is NOT a Communist state? (I too am concerned about whether you really understand what the word means.) HiLo48 (talk) 01:45, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

The DPRK removed all references to Communism in the latest revision to their constitution. According to the available literature, the leadership isn't even particularly aware of Marxist-Leninist dogma. It's a dictatorship that has some practices in common with Communism. 50.46.146.86 (talk) 01:54, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Juche state?

This seems a most unhelpful description since very few readers are likely to know what it means. It is just circular anyway. Juche is NK's official ideology, whatever that might be, and the word doesn't have any meaning beyond that. Is this word even part an actual classification system? I prefer "hereditary dictatorship", which is sourced in the text. Kauffner (talk) 02:31, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Political science does not have a stable and discipline wide accepted taxonomy of state formations. Given the uniqueness of Juche thought, and its clear and obvious applicability to North Korea, the uptake of this description in the secondary literature, and the decision of wikipedia to base its writing on reliable sources rather than what editor's think, this is an appropriate description. Fifelfoo (talk) 02:37, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Its a Communist state. Wikipedia Leftists dont like the term. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.16.254.69 (talk) 00:36, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

The constitution of DPR Korea has no references to Marxism-Leninism, only to 'Juche' ideals. - Peter (talk) 16:54, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

Everyone says "Stalinist", so that's we should have. Kauffner (talk) 22:44, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

You mean the United States media uses "Stalinist", even though Juche has little to do with Josef Stalin and his ideologies. Not "everyone". Just like how the United States media used to follow the claim that a certain Middle Eastern nation had WMDs. -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs email 09:04, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

My preference would be to abolish Infoboxes completely so that those simple folk who like simple and simplistic labels are forced to actually write and read sentences about a country's ideologies. But, Juche does have its own article, so we should stick with it. You don't like what that article says? Then fix it! HiLo48 (talk) 09:28, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

You mean the United States isn't everyone? 194.100.223.164 (talk) 13:37, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

A description as a "Juche state" could be challenged by a citation from Brian Myers's book, which argues that Juche is an idea designed for foreign consumption which does not guide the actual workings of the government. 50.46.146.86 (talk) 02:00, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Has a political science or sociology of politics field review article accepted Myer's opinion as dominating the scholarship? If not, then it is an unWEIGHTworthy challenge for a single line description. If Myers is in good standing in the academic community then his discussion of the nature of the state should be discussed in the body of the article. Fifelfoo (talk) 02:25, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

What is the national symbol of North Korea?

These references says "tiger":

• Smith, Ethan; Dauncey, Guy; Goodall, Jane (1 November 2007). Building an Ark: 101 Solutions to Animal Suffering. New Society Publishers. p. 218. ISBN 978-0-86571-566-0. http://books.google.com/books?id=J__8KMpM94YC&pg=PA218. Retrieved 1 January 2012. "... where they are the national animal of India, Malaysia, North Korea, South Korea, Nepal, Bangladesh and China ..." 
• Mishra, Hemanta; Jr., Jim Ottaway, (4 May 2010). Bones of the Tiger: Protecting the Man-Eaters of Nepal. Globe Pequot. p. 84. ISBN 978-1-59921-491-7. http://books.google.com/books?id=EVRmHok5fpQC&pg=PA84. Retrieved 1 January 2012. "Five Asian nations—Bangladesh, India, Malaysia, north Korea and south Korea—have honored the tiger with the title of “national Animal.”" 

while this article - List of national animals on Wikipedia says Chollima but gives no reference for it.

Can someone please clarify with reliable references? AshLin (talk) 21:37, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

It depends on what you're really asking. I don't really think the Chollima can be called the national animal, because it's a mythical creature, but it could be considered a national symbol, similar to Scotland's unicorn. You're best playing it safe and go with tiger as the national animal. I've found other sources (not all 100% reliable) saying it's the national animal (check the National Emblem article, it says the Korean Tiger is the national animal of NK), p- Peter (talk) 01:24, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

I'm trying to find reliable references, but the closest I could get to is [1]. Please note, this would be better discussed in the List of national animals article. - Peter (talk) 01:27, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Life Expectancy Rank

Shouldn't the life expectancy rank be updated to either the 2005-2010 UN number (125th and 67.3) or the 2011 CIA World Factbook number (169th and 63.81)? I didn't want to do it as I'm not sure which list the author used originally, and I didn't want to switch it over from one to the other. Bmeckel (talk) 18:32, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

There's no rank given on this article, but the figure of 63.81 is given and the source is the CIA world fact book. Peter (talk) 19:52, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Head of state

This UN document: http://www.un.int/protocol/documents/Hspmfm.pdf lists "The General Secretary of the Worker's Party of Korea, Chairman of the National Defence Commission of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea and Supreme Commander of the Korean People's Army" as "head of state". According to constitution, there is no office that can be called "head of state"- that title above is the highest official, but role of head of state is de facto vested in president of Presidium of National assembly (he recives letters of credence,...). So, first of all, does anyone know why that document states the title above as "head of state", and- why that does not contain any name- when is more then obvious that Kim Jong-Un is accepted by now?--DustBGD89-3 (talk) 19:52, 3 March 2012 (UTC)