• qwerty@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 days ago

    North Koreans may have GNI per capita of $1800 compared to $61900 of South Koreans, healthcare index of 37.5 compared to 82.9, infant mortality of 22.2/1000 vs 2.9/1000, maternal mortality of 107/100k vs 8/100k, internet access below 1%, purchasing power of 18.9 vs 116.6 and 42% of them may be undernourished, but at least they get to spend their, on average, 10 years shorter life compared to South Koreans serving his Excellency, Supreme Leader Kim Jong Un.

    • 1Malayali@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      7 days ago

      Palestinians have 5-10 years shorter life expectancy compared to Israelis

      Without the historical context, people can list stuff and make such inclusions.

      NK had 10-15% of their population killed by the USAmerican regime, many losses due to the indiscriminate bombings by the USAmerican regime too. Vietnam got media coverage, but NK was earlier.
      They were brutally sanctioned, threatened with nuclear weapons n all. Losing a major trading partner, the USSR, was also an issue.

      Yes, they are backward currently and may have issies, but they stood strong against imperialism and if their free flourishing would have been allowed, they would be much better.
      Like, NK was similar to SK till the 90’s or so.

      https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.DYN.LE00.IN?locations=KP-KR

      With the USAmerican regime seeining to be losing dominance, NK will probably be able to rise up with lesser fears of sanctions and sabotage.

      Also, if you are a USAmerican, have you heard of this:
      https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/sep/05/commando-team-north-korea-civilians-2019-mission

      This is what they face for not bowing down to capitalist dominance and USAmerican regime’s aggression. And they fight on.

      And regarding SK’s economic development:
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kijichon

      This was deemed as “necessary for soldiers to continue protecting South Korea, and was beneficial for economic development”.

      Pragmatic?