The political structure of a country is often presented on a spectrum; it is the degree of democracy or autocracy rather than a dichotomous classification. [1] For sure, many scholars have argued for a link between a democracy and an autocracy, admitting that phenomena observed in a democracy such as populism or nationalism are pathways to authoritarian politics. [2] This hints at the possibility that a theory that explains democracies could also be used to demystify one of the most notorious autocracies, North Korea.
Scholars are in consensus that North Korea is an autocracy. Yet, the regime’s official name, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, claims to be a rule of the people. The regime goes into extensive image-making of the Supreme Leader as loved by the people and holds elections to prove it. These rigorous efforts to feign legitimacy as power derived from the people draw parallels with populism.
The core of populism is at creating an image of the people and claiming to represent them as the rationale for gaining political power. It is fantasy in that “the people” as a singular entity does not exist. Scholars observe that populists idealize the “people” to be pure and holy against a contrasting entity that is taking away from the people’s interests. [3] This storytelling mandates that morality to be placed on political events; those that disagree with the leader are taken as defectors of the people. An academic describes populism as “a set of distinct claims” that has an “inner logic” (or rather, illogic) that prescribes how politics is run. Because it is only a thin ideology, a mere narrative at its core, political action lacks consistency. [4]
The North Korean narrative is very anti-capitalistic as was birthed amid the Cold War. The leader is a figure that stands against the evils of capitalism often represented by South Korea and the United States. The people are expected to share the disgust for capitalistic greed.
The people are also to be holy and pure in their love for the Supreme Leader, always patriotic and industrious. A kid has been rewarded a medal for losing her life while rescuing a portrait in a flood. [5] But even she is not “the ideal citizen;” she was applauded in the context that she had what it takes to become one. Since the narrative is a fantasy, it is impossible to reach the “holiness” of an ideal citizen of North Korea. In reality, most citizens censor themselves to stop their actions, words, and even thoughts against this narrative to the level of indoctrination.
Of course, the idea of hatred for capitalism and love for the leader are not necessarily consistent, but that very arbitrariness is what defines populism. For North Korea, the inconsistency has spoiled further into contradictions. A well-known example is “jangmadang” (장마당) which literally means marketplace. The North’s anti-capitalist and anti-Western agenda is in theory to be supported by a public distribution system where the Supreme Leader provides for the people. But in reality, the regime is much too impoverished to sustain such a system, pushing citizens into these markets for survival. Even the political elites are known to participate in Jangmadangs which are evaluated as indispensable to the North Korean economy to the point that it may collapse without them. They are suppressed, ironically, to put on a show for its anti-consumerist narrative. [6]
North Korea may be at the very end of democratic backsliding and populism. It teaches us that the stakes are high when it comes to the erosion of democracy.
[1] De Mesquita, B. B. (2013). Principles of international politics. Sage.;De Mesquita, B. B., & Smith, A. (2011). The dictator’s handbook: why bad behavior is almost always good politics. PublicAffairs.
[2] Taylor, A., & Frantz, E. (2016). How Democracies Fall Apart: Why Populism Is a Pathway to Autocracy. Foreign Affairs.;Müller, J. W. (2017). What is Populism?. Penguin UK.
[3] Benjamin De Cleen & Yannis Stavrakakis (2017) Distinctions and Articulations: A Discourse Theoretical Framework for the Study of Populism and Nationalism, Javnost – The Public, 24:4, 301 -319 [4] Ben Stanley (2008) The thin ideology of populism, Journal of Political Ideologies, 13:1, 95-110, DOI: 10.1080/13569310701822289 [5] Choi, Song Min. “Awards Conferred for Saving Kim Portraits,” January 16, 2020. https://www.dailynk.com/english/awards-conferred-for-saving-kim-po/. [6] Pak, Jung H. (2020) Becoming Kim Jong Un. Random House US.
Hi Kim Suheun,
I have noticed that you’ve done multiple blog posts on the subject of North Korea. I am also very interested in the nation and your posts have been a joy to read. I wanted to talk to a little bit about what I thought was the most interesting about your post and then ask you a few questions. First off, I think it is very interesting to look at North Korea as a Populist country. This fact is not something I had really thought about before. I was interested to continue reading. It is interesting to see that the bad guys here are the Capitalists and in The West are the Communists. It is just hard to tell exactly who the real bad guys are. To be honest both aren’t ideal. North Korea being too imporvrished to be able to survive without the market is also fascinating. Why is this? What can North Korea do? Is there a way for them to become a democracy?
Hello, Sam.
Thanks for your compliment! let me answer/clarify your questions:
1. I am not arguing that North Korea is a strictly “populist country,” rather, that the power structure incorporates populist logic. There is a subtle difference between the two because a lot of action that scholars define as populist cannot/do not need to take place in an autocracy. The term was also coined in democracies. But many scholars do in fact think that there is fluidity between democracies and autocracies, elements used to study democracies could be incorporated to understand the mechanisms of power that upholds an autocracy. (at least my argument is)
2. North Korea lacks comprehensive governing abilities to hold onto a centralized distribution system. It is due to both external and internal reasons. For example, sanctions and lack of technology.
3. North Korean government cannot fully represent the state– it is really hard to ask what they can do because when “they” means the government and political elites, they have no motivation to get on from the status quo. When “they” refer to the rest of the populace, they have no means. Democracy in North Korea, in my opinion, will take place only with unification with South Korea or something very similar.