The more I look into to Otto Warmbrier story, the more ridiculously obvious it is that he didn't actually break any north korea laws. What incentive did north korea have to stage a video of otto stealing a propaganda poster?
Why was otto warmbier arrested
Posts
Total:
39
-->
@Wylted
What incentive did north korea have to stage a video of otto stealing a propaganda poster?
Kim Jong-un wanted as hostage with which to negotiate. That how those dictators you admire so much do.
-->
@oromagi
Only dictators that have a libertarian bend.
A dictator that will require freedom by having a philosophy of negative rights, would be ideal.
-->
@Wylted
Only dictators that have a libertarian bend.
You don't understand what Libertarian means. Libertarians seek to minimize state power. Dictators by definition hold maximal state power.
Dictators, by definition, fear the freedom of their subjects and how such freedoms might be used to overthrow the dictatorship.
Negative rights are restrictions on state power and you can't put much in the way of restrictions on a dictator's power before they stop being a dictator. No dictator meeting the definition would possess a philosophy of negative rights or fail to suppress such ideals in his subject state.
-->
@Wylted
As Nations go,
North Korea is a bit of a nuthouse to say the least,
So not a place to go souvenir hunting, during your gap year.
"Why" is largely irrelevant'
Other than why go there.
Should have gone south,
To meet sensible Koreans.
-->
@oromagi
You don't understand what Libertarian means. Libertarians seek to minimize state power. Dictators by definition hold maximal state power.
The dictator in this scenario would enforce a philosophy of negative rights, therefore maximizing freedom, which in turn would create a virtual utopian state.
The ability to do something is not the same as actually taking advantage of that ability. We can see in democratic states the break down of society.
People are now voting to take away the rights of others. Democracy is 2 wolves and a sheep, voting for what's for dinner.
-->
@zedvictor4
So not a place to go souvenir hunting, during your gap year.
He bought a souvenir from a souvenir place. It wasn't smart to vacation there, but it is irrelevant as to North Korea's motives.
-->
@oromagi
You are taking this off topic. I asked about North Koreas motivations. You said a negotiating tactic, but negotiating over what?
-->
@Wylted
They were perhaps motivated by their inherent paranoia.
-->
@zedvictor4
They literally set him up, and filmed a Korean stealing the poster and claiming it was him. What about that screams paranoia to you?
-->
@Wylted
Korean society screams paranoia.
So why they do what they do is all relative.
We can become complacent with own our conditioned sensibilities, and also expect everyone else to behave as we do.
What motivated Otto to go to North Korea.
-->
@zedvictor4
Korean society screams paranoia.
Perhaps, but not every action is based on paranoia though.
So why they do what they do is all relative.
I am sure that is somehow relevant to your first point, in your head some how.
We can become complacent with own our conditioned sensibilities, and also expect everyone else to behave as we do.
Okay, sure. Not exactly relevant here though as I am asking what their motivations are, and not insisting they think like us.
What motivated Otto to go to North Korea.
Irrelevant, but I will answer. It was obviously because it was an adventure. He wanted a fun adventure and the travel agency he used claimed it was safe.
-->
@Wylted
There are a hundred and one places to have an adventure.
-->
@zedvictor4
There are a hundred and one places to have an adventure.
Thanks for pointing out the obvious.
On a separate note, the travel firm, his parents and anybody at all who was involved with not talking him out of this trip is an absolute morally corrupt piece of crap.
If they tried to talk him out of it and failed, I respect them much more than if they went 'oh wow, you're so brave' and let him end up this way.
Never set foot in North Korea, it is tyranny on absolute steroids.
I don't think he told his parents where he was going. I could be wrong, but I think he knew they would object, and his friends went with him
-->
@Wylted
R.I.P. Otto Warmbier.
He went looking for an adventure.
And certainly found one.
-->
@zedvictor4
Why did north korea frame him for something he was innocent of?
-->
@Wylted
They had their reasons.
Reasons that we would probably find unreasonable.
But not reasons that should necessarily be unexpected, given what we know about North Korea.
Do you know the reason?
-->
@zedvictor4
I don't know the reason,which is why I asked for the reason.
-->
@Wylted
-->@oromagiYou are taking this off topic.
That's quite false. You brought up the oxymoron of Libertarian Dictators and I corrected your misunderstanding.
I asked about North Koreas motivations. You said a negotiating tactic, but negotiating over what?
Well, the other three Americans in North Korean custody at the same time as Warmbier were released on the announcement of the first ever North Korean-US Summit, the crowning diplomatic achievement of Kim Jong-Un's reign. It seems reasonable to assume that if Warmbier's health had not failed he would have been included in this group without much media attention.
Trump:
- agreed to never place nuclear weapons on the Korean penninsula
- ceased joint military exercises with South Korea
- promised that the US will never attack North Korea
- agreed to sign a peace treaty ending the Korean War (never happened)
- agreed to normalize official diplomatic ties between North Korea and US (never happened)
- agreed in principle that all US troops should be withdrawn from the Korean Penninsula (The Republican majority Senate passed a law weeks later prohibiting any such withdrawal, Kim interpreted this a broken promise and renounced his promises)
Kim:
- agreed to return American hostages
- agreed to stop manufacturing nuclear weapons (has built 8 new nukes since)
- agreed to return remains of 7,700 US soldiers left over from the Korean War (returned 1 dogtag and 340 remains of which 40 have been identified as US soldiers)
Trump forgot to mention Warmbier at the First North Korean-US summit but did remember to bring up the subject at the second North Korean-US summit in 2019. Kim said that he'd never heard of Warmbier and Trump stated that he would take Kim at his word (Warmbier had been tried and convicted for tearing down a poster by the North Korean Supreme Court on state television).
-->
@oromagi
That's quite false. You brought up the oxymoron of Libertarian Dictators and I corrected your misunderstanding
Libertarianism is not so much the system of governance be it democracy or dictatorship, as much as it is about the role of government, being one that exclusively defends negative rights and something akin to a night's watchmen type country.
Libertarian philosophy pretty much is silent on the style of governance. Oromagi, you don't understand libertarianism better than me.
I know in your mind a dictator in practice will never be able to resist using the amount of power they have. That's likely because every dictator you have seen has been pretty close to totalitarian. That doesn't mean that in theory, a libertarian dictator couldn't exist.
-->
@Wylted
Best ask Kim.
-->
@zedvictor4
He doesn't respond to my emails
-->
@Wylted
Libertarianism is not so much the system of governance.....
in fact Libertarianism is not at all a system of government but rather a political philosophy about governance, stemming from Liberalism.
be it democracy or dictatorship,
again, no such thing as Libertarian dictatorship
[Libertarianism] exclusively defends negative rights and something akin to a night's watchmen type country.
That's quite wrong-headed. The night-watchmen state notion of governance is but a tiny subset of Libertarian thought, which is itself a small subset of Liberal thinking.
"In the United States, this form of government is mainly associated with libertarian and Objectivist political philosophy. In other countries, minarchism is also advocated by some non-anarchist libertarian socialists and other left-libertarians. The United Kingdom in the 19th century has been described by historian Charles Townshend as a standard-bearer for this form of government."
Libertarian philosophy pretty much is silent on the style of governance.
Since the night-watchmen state is defined as a style of governance, your own words have just contradicted you.
Oromagi, you don't understand libertarianism better than me.
That's objectively false. Your political notions are consistently inconsistent, disconnected from any scholarship, and mostly dependent on your compulsion to provoke.
I know in your mind a dictator in practice will never be able to resist using the amount of power they have. That's likely because every dictator you have seen has been pretty close to totalitarian. That doesn't mean that in theory, a libertarian dictator couldn't exist.
If the first 10,000 years of formal government proved incapable of producing such a model let's assume that model is very difficult to achieve and not worth waiting around for.
‘Many forms of Government have been tried, and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.…’
Winston S Churchill, 11 November 1947
-->
@Wylted
Book an adventure then.
And ask whilst you're there.
-->
@Wylted
The dictator in this scenario would enforce a philosophy of negative rights, therefore maximizing freedom,
You don’t seem to understand how dictatorships work.
The main difference between a democracy and a dictatorship is its source of power. In a democracy, the power comes from the perceived legitimacy of the governing authority, which requires consent of the governed. A dictatorship does not have that consent, it instead governs by force which is only effective as long as the society it governs fears the authority.
There is no real world scenario where any governing authority would not only rise to power but maintain power without consent or fear. A dictatorship by definition is not governing with consent, and it is not plausible in any sense that it could instill and maintain fear amongst the populace while invoking a philosophy of respecting everyone’s rights. This idea is pure fantasy.
-->
@Wylted
People are now voting to take away the rights of others. Democracy is 2 wolves and a sheep, voting for what's for dinner.
That’s the whole point of a constitution.
-->
@Double_R
That’s the whole point of a constitution.
The point of a constitution is to destroy the function of Democracy and mob rule? Explain.
-->
@Greyparrot
Explain what? Your ridiculous strawman? Read the post and try again. It’s only 2 sentences. You can do it, I believe in you.