Obviously the DPRK is not remotely fascist and in fact represents a historically progressive source, and Americans talking shit like this have nothing worthwhile to say. That said, I've never even heard of someone claiming DPRK citizens in general are free to leave (other than diplomats and various others with international business). They need permission to leave, like I believe is also the case in Cuba, which is part of why in both cases there is such an industry around trafficking out "defectors" (in the modern day, a mix of people trying to escape poverty, fugitives, and victims of involuntary human trafficking).

[–] Xiisadaddy@lemmygrad.ml 17 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I'm pretty sure they're allowed to cross into like northern China and such, but arent allowed to cross the DMZ? Not sure, but i remember hearing that somewhere. Also I've seen images of the border between China, and the DPRK and its not militarized at all. Like you wouldnt know a border is there otherwise. So if they do make people get permission I don't think it's something they care to put that much effort into enforcing except for the south.

I do know though that DPRK citizens who end up outside the DPRK and get caught by western sympathetic groups get sent to South Kora and are basically held hostage there, and not allowed to leave (unless its to go to propaganda against the DPRK).

There a documentary about it i haven't seen in ages and should probably rewatch called "Loyal Citizens of Pyonyang in Seoul." or something like that. Where they interview DPRK citizens who aren't allowed to go home but want to.

[–] purpleworm@hexbear.net 7 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

You are right that the ROK holds DPRK citizens captive (that's the main thing I meant with "victims of involuntary human trafficking" of "defectors").

That said, I really don't think your conjecture is right. I think a bunch of DPRK businesses operate in China, so it's easy enough to get permission to work there, but there is still border security (see when Laura Ling got owned) and China still captures people fleeing the DPRK and ships them back. It's not like with the South where they will basically be captured like a Pokemon and enslaved to the propaganda apparatus, a DPRKorean who escapes into China still has a long way to go to get anywhere that won't ultimately send them back, so it's not as all-or-nothing as the DMZ.

Edit: To be clear, I'm not saying this to attack the DPRK, I think the DPRK itself would agree to this as roughly the official word.

[–] Xiisadaddy@lemmygrad.ml 11 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Yeah that seems about right i wasnt implying they have open border just meant like the China border is quite normal. All countries have border security of some kind. And its normal to deport people who enter your country illegally back to their country of origin too. (Normal as in that's what most places do, not that its a good thing to do).

Like not counting the DMZ (Which both Korean Governments have as one of their borders.) The main barriers to a DPRK citizen trying to leave the DPRK are mostly a result of the sanctions i think. Like if someone from the DPRK gets permission from their own government to go on a vacation in France for example its not like France is going to let them. So when people say people aren't allowed to leave as if that's some dig at the DPRK its weird to me. Like they are sanctioned by most countries on Earth, and their citizens wouldn't be safe in most other countries anyway.

Like if the rest of the world was actually opening and welcoming to the DPRK and the DPRK was still like "Nobody can leave!" that would be a different story, but that clearly is not the case yknow?

[–] purpleworm@hexbear.net 6 points 1 week ago

That's fair

[–] SamotsvetyVIA@hexbear.net 14 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

I've never even heard of someone claiming DPRK citizens in general are free to leave

It's important to keep bringing up the fact that the UN Security Council literally forbade them from leaving anyway. At this point I have the resolutions memorized because no one besides me ever mentions it IRL or anywhere.

UN Security Council resolutions 2397

The resolution also called for the return of all North Korean nationals earning income abroad, with some humanitarian exceptions, within 24 months.

and 2375

Limits visas to be provided by N.K. laborers overseas. Existing visas are allowed to continue until expired, but no new visas are allowed to be issued. The U.S. estimates this will "eventually deny the regime another half billion dollars each year it takes from the nearly 100,000 North Korean citizens working around the world"

By the way, the 100,000 NK citizens number is just from an RFA article, which they keep publishing year after year. 2375 was instituted in 2017, and here is an RFA article from 2024 with the same exact number.

[–] purpleworm@hexbear.net 10 points 1 week ago

Good point, thanks for pointing this out. I wonder how something this severe and nakedly punitive was able to be passed.