Sure, maybe not the best example off the top of my head. But not bad either. While levels of democracy were bad (i.e., higher autocracy) in the early years, t

Sure, maybe not the best example off the top of my head. But not bad either. While levels of democracy were bad (i.e., higher autocracy) in the early years, the trend has certainly been towards democracy, and growth has been solid under both conditions, and steadier in the last few decades. Sure, trading with the US and ER is also a factor, but that is also a benefit of being a democracy, instead of being an autocracy and relying on international criminal activities for currency, as does NK. And while these factors may account for some of the difference it certainly doesn't count for all of it. While they're on two halves of the same patch of land, NK should also have some advantages with their direct land connections to China an Russia. Yet, NK residents are literally kept ignorant and starving, while SK is one of the most prosperous nations in the world. It would be extreme paternalism to argue that even if they had good information and the means to make a self-determining government, that they would not do so. In fact, parts of the experiment have already been done in NK — while any type of private enterprise was absolutely banned, it still sprung up all the time, and in one of their earlier famines, the govt relented and it was allowed because it did help better distribute resources. Just because people who don't like what thy have and are powerless to change it, does not mean that they want it or it is best for them. [0] https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/KOR/south-korea/gdp-growth-rate https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/KOR/south-korea/gdp-gr...