4 ms·

And yet the World Food Programme continues shipping food and other basic supplies to North Korea to avoid further famines. Surely such famines would not be par

And yet the World Food Programme continues shipping food and other basic supplies to North Korea to avoid further famines. Surely such famines would not be particularly nice, but on the other hand, recent events in the Middle East have demonstrated yet again that no government can establish itself permanently without the support of its people; hence rendering the North Korean people responsible for these nuclear threats just as much as their government.

EliRivers 14y ago
Have you been there? It seems a stretch to hold people responsible for the actions of their government when they are born and die in the same village, need permission to leave that village (and "wanting to go on a trip" doesn't count), have no way to communicate with anyone outside the village, have effectively no way to influence their government whatsoever, and the only source of information they have is the official government version of everything. You have as much influence over the DPRK government as they do.
- claudius 14y ago
  Lack of freedom is maybe a reason to reject responsibility for one’s own society, but neither a justification nor an excuse. Being allowed to reject such responsibility on the basis of a lack of freedom would make it too easy for the general public to blame a select few for crimes committed by the state whilst enjoying their results just as well.
  - EliRivers 14y ago
    Lack of freedom is maybe a reason to reject responsibility for one’s own society, but neither a justification nor an excuse. They're not rejecting responsibility. It's not as if they used to be fully in control and one day decided that they'd have a go instead at being prisoners of the state, utterly powerless, to see how that went. Nobody allowed them to reject responsibility. Being allowed to reject such responsibility on the basis of a lack of freedom would make it too easy for the general public to blame a select few for crimes Are you serious? You want to hold people responsible for something they didn't do and had absolutely no control over? If that's how it is, then YOU are also to be held responsible.

EliRivers 14y ago

Have you been there? It seems a stretch to hold people responsible for the actions of their government when they are born and die in the same village, need permission to leave that village (and "wanting to go on a trip" doesn't count), have no way to communicate with anyone outside the village, have effectively no way to influence their government whatsoever, and the only source of information they have is the official government version of everything. You have as much influence over the DPRK government as they do.

claudius 14y ago
Lack of freedom is maybe a reason to reject responsibility for one’s own society, but neither a justification nor an excuse. Being allowed to reject such responsibility on the basis of a lack of freedom would make it too easy for the general public to blame a select few for crimes committed by the state whilst enjoying their results just as well.
- EliRivers 14y ago
  Lack of freedom is maybe a reason to reject responsibility for one’s own society, but neither a justification nor an excuse. They're not rejecting responsibility. It's not as if they used to be fully in control and one day decided that they'd have a go instead at being prisoners of the state, utterly powerless, to see how that went. Nobody allowed them to reject responsibility. Being allowed to reject such responsibility on the basis of a lack of freedom would make it too easy for the general public to blame a select few for crimes Are you serious? You want to hold people responsible for something they didn't do and had absolutely no control over? If that's how it is, then YOU are also to be held responsible.